Topic: England v Sri Lanka series (Read 33399 times)

Montys Beard · « **Reply #135 on:** June 04, 2014, 04:39:51 AM »

Not really sure where I fall on this, on the one hand he warned Buttler so was within his rights, on the other hand Buttler really didn't look like he was stealing a run.

Either way Swanny summed up my views on it perfectly...

"I think if I'd been called for chucking I'd try to keep a low profile for a while rather than pull out the mankad!!! Incredible scenes!"

He's already been called for chucking (I think he's a chucker personally) so should have been keeping his head down, instead he's Mankadding Buttler knowing what kind of reaction it would bring even if he was within his rights to do it. The blokes either very stupid or...o.....no, I've got nothing, he's clearly just very stupid.

Jenko · « **Reply #136 on:** June 04, 2014, 05:12:43 AM »

Butler was warned in the last game and in his game so I think it's 100% fair game to mankad him. A bowler cannot overstep the mark so why should a batsmen be given an advantage by backing up so far. Rules are rules!

slcric · « **Reply #137 on:** June 04, 2014, 06:04:41 AM »

Quote from: procricket B3 on June 03, 2014, 04:06:54 PM

Crap cricket poor at that standard very poor maybe the chucker should learn to bowl instead of chucking.

His was hardly stealing just backing up he naturally went hardly running down.

Within the rules they say shame his arm isn't

Dave,i have been following this forum for a long time and you are one of the few members on here i had respect for although we hadn't had any dealings.
But this reply of yours is very poor and being a true Sri Lankan,this is very offensive.Respect out of the window bud.

Now you said its poor cricket at that standard.instead of questioning the Lankan teams integrity why dont you question the bloody MCC who set the rules for that standard in the first place?it's well within the rules of cricket to run out a non striker who is out of his crease before the completion of a bowling action.this is not my opinion this is a fact

.Now coming onto your suggestion that chucker should learn how to bowl is very funny the way i see it.surely someone who doesn't know how to bowl can not remain to be the frontline spinner of the NO. 1 ranked T20 team and NO. 2 ranked ODI team?perhaps you and all you Englishmen are jealous and disappointed of the bitter truth that England do not have a international quality spinner.

what are your credentials to say he needs to learn how to bowl?you are at best a sorry old man who drops some half trackers on gloomy Saturday evenings.just admit that your so called English "batsman" can not face quality spin,nor England would be able to produce an international quality spinner for years to come.dont have to bitch about it.

Another point you made was that "His was hardly stealing just backing up he naturally went hardly running down." so going by your logic,if a striker is stumped,can he argue with the opposition captain that he wasn't stealing a run and he naturally went hardly running down despite the bails being removed while he is caught outside his crease?which is also perfectly fine by the law?how stupid is your logic?

before pointing fingers at others,look into your own team and dressing room.the truth is,England was and will never be a team of unity and spirited cricketers.dressing room meltdowns,backstabbing,throwing players out of the team,dealing with other teams' coaches underhand and the list goes on.you and your so called English team is not in a state to comment about others.and lets not forget how that dickhead Root stood their like a muppet when he was clearly caught off his gloves.where was the spirit of cricket there?

i can now see why Vic Nicholas on here shows that sort of attitude towards some of you Englishmen.

i dont have to remind you about how many "Spirit of the game" awards Sri Lanka has won and how Sangakkara is the only player in history to deliver the Cowdry lecture while still representing a national team.we have always and always will be known to be gentlemen as far as cricket is concerned.

Sore losers some of you Englishmen are,thats all.

skip1973 · « **Reply #138 on:** June 04, 2014, 06:31:04 AM »

I'm not English and my opinion is he chucks, the SL team love playing the victim and whilst I have no objection to this mankad I do have an objection to his action, it's woeful.

slcric · « **Reply #139 on:** June 04, 2014, 06:38:53 AM »

Quote from: Montys Beard on June 04, 2014, 04:39:51 AM

Not really sure where I fall on this, on the one hand he warned Buttler so was within his rights, on the other hand Buttler really didn't look like he was stealing a run.

Either way Swanny summed up my views on it perfectly...

"I think if I'd been called for chucking I'd try to keep a low profile for a while rather than pull out the mankad!!! Incredible scenes!"

He's already been called for chucking (I think he's a chucker personally) so should have been keeping his head down, instead he's Mankadding Buttler knowing what kind of reaction it would bring even if he was within his rights to do it. The blokes either very stupid or...o.....no, I've got nothing, he's clearly just very stupid.

Why would he keep a low profile because of accusations?just because thats what Grame Swann would have done doesn't mean Senanayeka should follow the same.We are no pussies to run and hide and follow Swann's English mentality.and how does thinking intelligent and earning his team a wicket make him very stupid?

His action is legal and legit.he knows it and the Sri Lankan management knows it.thats what they pushed him to play the deciding game and brought him on inside the first 10 overs.

tim2000s · « **Reply #140 on:** June 04, 2014, 06:54:42 AM »

Before anyone responds in an extreme way to SLCric's and Dave's posts, can I request that anyone responding does it in a calm and collected fashion?

I think it's fair to say that all international batsmen (including those from Sri Lanka) stand their ground until given out by the umpire.

The reason this one is controversial is that the rules that most people know about Mankadding stem from the MCC Laws, which state:

Quote

42.15. Bowler attempting to run out non-striker before delivery

The bowler is permitted, before entering his delivery stride, to attempt to run out the non-striker. Whether the attempt is successful or not, the ball shall not count as one of the over.
If the bowler fails in an attempt to run out the non-striker, the umpire shall call and signal Dead ball as soon as possible.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aDhRuslE37U

Which in this case in the video, would be a dead ball, and not out, as Senanayake has entered his delivery stride in all cases.

Under the ICC International rules, 42.15 states:

Quote

The bowler is permitted, before releasing the ball and provided he has not completed his usual delivery swing, to attempt to run out the non- striker. Whether the attempt is successful or not, the ball shall not count as one of the over. If the bowler fails in an attempt to run out the non-striker, the umpire shall call and signal Dead ball as soon possible.

Or in other words, to put it in to laymans terms, the ICC rule is "Stay in your crease until the point of delivery or you risk being run out".

I'd suggest that Senanayake and the Sri Lankan coaches had taken a look at the rules and the video of Buttler batting and worked out that he was applying the MCC rather than ICC rule and hence did this.

Whose fault is it? In this case Buttler's for not knowing the rules properly and Kudos to the Sri Lankan team for spotting an opportunity at getting a relatively cheap wicket.

As for Senanayake's Action? It's been questioned for the two years that he has been playing international cricket. It hasn't been reported because umpires fear the Darryl Hair treatment. To the naked eye, watching the TV, or at a cricket ground for those who love the beautiful game, it looks like a chuck. As he has been reported, we'll now find out whether it is.

FvanN · « **Reply #141 on:** June 04, 2014, 07:13:43 AM »

Quote from: tim2000s on June 04, 2014, 06:54:42 AM

Before anyone responds in an extreme way to SLCric's and Dave's posts, can I request that anyone responding does it in a calm and collected fashion?

I think it's fair to say that all international batsmen (including those from Sri Lanka) stand their ground until given out by the umpire.

The reason this one is controversial is that the rules that most people know about Mankadding stem from the MCC Laws, which state:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aDhRuslE37U

Which in this case in the video, would be a dead ball, and not out, as Senanayake has entered his delivery stride in all cases.

Under the ICC International rules, 42.15 states:
Or in other words, to put it in to laymans terms, the ICC rule is "Stay in your crease until the point of delivery or you risk being run out".

I'd suggest that Senanayake and the Sri Lankan coaches had taken a look at the rules and the video of Buttler batting and worked out that he was applying the MCC rather than ICC rule and hence did this.

Whose fault is it? In this case Buttler's for not knowing the rules properly and Kudos to the Sri Lankan team for spotting an opportunity at getting a relatively cheap wicket.

As for Senanayake's Action? It's been questioned for the two years that he has been playing international cricket. It hasn't been reported because umpires fear the Darryl Hair treatment. To the naked eye, watching the TV, or at a cricket ground for those who love the beautiful game, it looks like a chuck. As he has been reported, we'll now find out whether it is.

Well put sir...

Manormanic · « **Reply #142 on:** June 04, 2014, 07:30:49 AM »

Quote from: tim2000s on June 04, 2014, 06:54:42 AM

Before anyone responds in an extreme way to SLCric's and Dave's posts, can I request that anyone responding does it in a calm and collected fashion?

Oh, go on, lets have a flame war. Pretty please? Pretty please with toasted marshmallows?

Quote from: tim2000s on June 04, 2014, 06:54:42 AM

As for Senanayake's Action? It's been questioned for the two years that he has been playing international cricket. It hasn't been reported because umpires fear the Darryl Hair treatment. To the naked eye, watching the TV, or at a cricket ground for those who love the beautiful game, it looks like a chuck. As he has been reported, we'll now find out whether it is.

I don't personally have too big of an issue with the Mankading; whilst I am not convinced I would have allowed one of my bowlers to uphold the appeal and think that the so called spirit of the game was being stretched, it was nontheless within the laws of the game and Buttler had allegedly been warned so can have few real grumbles.

But Senanayake's action I have real issues with - you say it "looks" like a chuck - well, I've seen it slowed down to near freeze frame and I can assure you it IS a chuck, and as has been discussed at much length on here, chucking is the single biggest threat to the game outside of illegal sub-continental bookmakers and the corruption they bring. It would be heartening to have heard from some Sri Lankan fans to the effect that they feel the same way, or at least some evidence to contradict the allegation, but instead we hear SLCric's assertion that to even suggest that a Sri Lankan chucks is:
1. An insult to the good name of Sri Lanka and
2. Bitterness on the part of someone who can't acheive to the same standard (which is pretty odd because I'm sure most club cricketers have tried bowling with a Murali action in the nets for a laugh and found that, yes, they too can acheive insane revolutions on the ball if they don't worry about the niceties of the rules.

This is exactly the same attitude that was seen when Darryl Hair (quite correctly) no balled good old Muchi some years back, and is trotted out every time an Asian spinner is found to have a questionnable action. The insult to the good name of Sri Lanka is not the suggestion that individual bowlers are chuckers any more than it would be an insult to the good name of England to state that Mervyn Westfield was a match fixer - the insult is that the team and their fans appear to think that they should be permitted to carry on in such a way regardless!

stevie_94_ · « **Reply #143 on:** June 04, 2014, 07:45:46 AM »

Was at the game yesterday and his action defintley looked as much of a chuck live as it does on TV
Felt cheated about the run out as well not in the sense that it wasn't out but in the fact you've paid your money to go and watch top level cricket and to see something like that wasn't on. guarantee if you went back and looked through the footage of the series there would be evidence of the sri Lankan batsmen doing the exact same thing, its not trying to steal a run just something you end up doing

Manormanic · « **Reply #144 on:** June 04, 2014, 07:51:41 AM »

Quote from: stevie_94_ on June 04, 2014, 07:45:46 AM

Was at the game yesterday and his action defintley looked as much of a chuck live as it does on TV
Felt cheated about the run out as well not in the sense that it wasn't out but in the fact you've paid your money to go and watch top level cricket and to see something like that wasn't on. guarantee if you went back and looked through the footage of the series there would be evidence of the sri Lankan batsmen doing the exact same thing, its not trying to steal a run just something you end up doing

Quite possibly - as I said, it doesn't reflect well on them overall but was technically in keeping with the laws of the game.

sgcricket · « **Reply #145 on:** June 04, 2014, 07:53:41 AM »

@stevie_94, its something you end up doing only so that you can take a quick run. You see lesser instances of this in test cricket as the urgency is not the same. And when Buttler had already been warned twice, there is no reason not to run him out.

As for the allegations about chucking, I am sure the tests will reveal the truth. I am sure they will use footage of his bowling from the series and compare it to his action during the tests to determine whether he is indeed chucking.

tim2000s · « **Reply #146 on:** June 04, 2014, 07:53:49 AM »

There's a reason I said "looks" in italics. Whilst I am equally convinced that it is a chuck, until it is proven otherwise.

3. Definition of fair delivery - the arm

A ball is fairly delivered in respect of the arm if, once the bowler�s arm has reached the level of the shoulder in the delivery swing, the elbow joint is not straightened partially or completely from that point until the ball has left the hand. This definition shall not debar a bowler from flexing or rotating the wrist in the delivery swing.

Is the standard MCC law as we all understand it. I can't find an amended law from the ICC that states something along the lines of:

"A ball is fairly delivered in respect of the arm if, once the bowler�s arm has reached the level of the shoulder in the delivery swing, the elbow joint is not straightened by more than 15 degrees from that point until the ball has left the hand."

But this 15 degree straightening is supposed to be on the margins of what is visible to the naked eye. For me, if Senanayake is proved to be within the 15 degree window, then okay, but the marginality of that "inside" and the fact that he throws will not stop him being a chucker. The fact that it is clearly visible to the naked eye would suggest that the 15 degree measure imposed is in fact incorrect.

He will simply be a chucker within the margins of error that the ICC allow and therefore he and others will be playing to the letter, but not the spirit, of the rules.

Manormanic · « **Reply #147 on:** June 04, 2014, 07:57:26 AM »

Interesting comparison between attitudes in Sri Lanka to allegations that Muchichuckalot and Senanayake chuck (or Pakistan to similar thoughts regarding Saqliain and Saeed Ajmal) and that seen here when the likes of James Kirtley and Geoff Cope have had their actions questionned.

mattcoll12491 · « **Reply #148 on:** June 04, 2014, 08:10:39 AM »

Quote from: Johnny on June 03, 2014, 11:19:48 PM

Why the hell, for this particular rule are the regs different??!

It's the same for at least one other law, wide ball/no ball for a bouncer above head height to name for example. There are probably others, but that's just one that springs to mind

Giraffe208 · « **Reply #149 on:** June 04, 2014, 08:12:55 AM »

Across the series, England have played some quite brilliant cricket at times but at others it has been woeful at best! I think Sri Lanka deserved their 3-2 win on the balance of the games.

Now onto the talking points. The Buttler run out we all know is fair game. We don't like it and would prefer to see wickets earned but after his warning you would have hoped he would have utilised some common sense. He didn't so we need to move on.

The comments made previously though are interesting ones. A reply from one person has developed into a rather scathing attack on England and generalisations on English people on here which I find incredibly disappointing given the usual insightful and thought-provoking comments I read on here day to day. Each to their own though but I for one think it leaves a slight sour taste.

The most important aspect of the series and cricket in general for me is stamping out areas of play not within the laws. That revolves around Shenanayake. I'm not surprised he played yesterday and if I was Sri Lanka I would play him aswell until you are told he can't as he is incredibly effective. His action is very suspect and if cleared I will lose all faith in how the ICC conduct their testing. I hope he adapts his technique and continues to play but in its current state it makes a mockery of requiring to bowl with a straight(ish) arm. I truly wish England had an international class spinner in their ranks but not at the detriment of the laws of the game. Unfortunately they don't so lets all look forward to the test series as i think last night will add a bit of spice and make it a very competitive contest. Onwards and upwards!

Author Topic: England v Sri Lanka series (Read 33399 times)

Montys Beard

Re: England v Sri Lanka series

Jenko

Re: England v Sri Lanka series

slcric

Re: England v Sri Lanka series

skip1973

Re: England v Sri Lanka series

slcric

Re: England v Sri Lanka series

tim2000s

Re: England v Sri Lanka series

FvanN

Re: England v Sri Lanka series

Manormanic

Re: England v Sri Lanka series

stevie_94_

Re: England v Sri Lanka series

Manormanic

Re: England v Sri Lanka series

sgcricket

Re: England v Sri Lanka series

tim2000s

Re: England v Sri Lanka series

Manormanic

Re: England v Sri Lanka series

mattcoll12491

Re: England v Sri Lanka series

Giraffe208

Re: England v Sri Lanka series