Topic: Lewis Mcmanus incident (Read 16186 times)

mo_town · « **Reply #15 on:** April 15, 2021, 11:57:12 AM »

Quote from: SouthpawMark on April 15, 2021, 11:41:06 AM

Yes they are, as they are leaving it in the hands of the umpires to make a decision. Not walking isn�t cheating IMO. For a better comparison, I�d perhaps ask about bowlers who appeal for caught behind, knowing full well that the batter hadn�t hit it.

Neither of the comparisons are accurate imo. I would compare it to a fielder claiming a catch fully knowing that it bounced or a fielder touching the boundary line and not indicating that it is a boundary. If you know something for sure and hide it, that's cheating.

AJ2014 · « **Reply #16 on:** April 15, 2021, 12:18:40 PM »

For me, batsmen are the biggest cheaters!
As they always want to bat on and on and on!
This "drive" make them stay at the crease and look at the umpires, hoping not to be given out! Otherwise there's no other answer for batters staying in there, while they're definitely out
I hate "Fake" appealing, hoping that when I do appeal, that will be more convincing!

brokenbat · « **Reply #17 on:** April 15, 2021, 03:45:28 PM »

There�s one huge difference between batsmen who don�t walk, and the fielding side claiming a false catch or stumping... the fielding side is the one who appeals - they are the �aggressor� (the ones proactively seeking a dismissal). If, in a bizarre world, the batsman got to say �not out� or �out� after every ball, then perhaps you could equate the two. The fielder can proactively tell the umpire that the catch is not clean...the batsman can�t tell the umpire that he didn�t edge the ball (for a caught behind appeal) or that there was an inside edge onto the pad (lbw appeal).
So, because the fielding side is the aggressor (ie they alone have the power to initiate an appeal and communicate with the umpire), it is totally unacceptable and inappropriate for them to claim a false catch / stumping, and totally acceptable and appropriate for the batsman to stand his/her ground until the umpire gives them out.

ProCricketer1982 · « **Reply #18 on:** April 15, 2021, 04:40:22 PM »

Quote from: mo_town on April 15, 2021, 10:36:03 AM

the character of a ~~sportsman~~ Person is revealed.

ProCricketer1982 · « **Reply #19 on:** April 15, 2021, 04:41:03 PM »

Quote from: Gurujames on April 15, 2021, 11:01:46 AM

How is this different to not walking when you know you have snicked off? But in these cases SOME people seem to think it�s ok to leave the decision up to the umpire.

corrected for you

ProCricketer1982 · « **Reply #20 on:** April 15, 2021, 04:43:42 PM »

Quote from: Warneymonster on April 15, 2021, 11:16:00 AM

i feel like this is the first time he's been caught, rather than the first time he has done it.

and this is why you can't let people off lightly. it makes it worth cheating again

ProCricketer1982 · « **Reply #21 on:** April 15, 2021, 04:46:08 PM »

Quote from: SouthpawMark on April 15, 2021, 11:41:06 AM

Yes they are, as they are leaving it in the hands of the umpires to make a decision. Not walking isn�t cheating IMO. For a better comparison, I�d perhaps ask about bowlers who appeal for caught behind, knowing full well that the batter hadn�t hit it.

Not walking when you know you're out IS cheating.

Appealing as a bowler just on the off chance is also cheating

appealing from square leg, gully, point when you have NO IDEA what's what is also realistically.. an attempt to cheat

AJ2014 · « **Reply #22 on:** April 15, 2021, 04:46:50 PM »

Quote from: brokenbat on April 15, 2021, 03:45:28 PM

There’s one huge difference between batsmen who don’t walk, and the fielding side claiming a false catch or stumping... the fielding side is the one who appeals - they are the “aggressor” (the ones proactively seeking a dismissal). If, in a bizarre world, the batsman got to say “not out” or “out” after every ball, then perhaps you could equate the two. The fielder can proactively tell the umpire that the catch is not clean...the batsman can’t tell the umpire that he didn’t edge the ball (for a caught behind appeal) or that there was an inside edge onto the pad (lbw appeal).
So, because the fielding side is the aggressor (ie they alone have the power to initiate an appeal and communicate with the umpire), it is totally unacceptable and inappropriate for them to claim a false catch / stumping, and totally acceptable and appropriate for the batsman to stand his/her ground until the umpire gives them out.

That's a batsman talking here
A batsman knows 99% of the times he's nicked it or not.
Not talking about lbw, run out etc which comes with a doubt.
Jeffery Boycott said: when a batsman looks behind, that means he's nicked it!

ProCricketer1982 · « **Reply #23 on:** April 15, 2021, 04:48:11 PM »

Quote from: AJ2014 on April 15, 2021, 04:46:50 PM

A batsman knows 99.9% of the times he's snicked it or not.

I know every single time if I've hit it or not.. without fail. Not walking is cheating (so is appealing for LBW's when you also know it's not out though!!! - just cause it's league or club umpires and they love a trigger)

AJ2014 · « **Reply #24 on:** April 15, 2021, 04:56:24 PM »

Quote from: ProCricketer1982 on April 15, 2021, 04:48:11 PM

I know every single time if I've hit it or not.. without fail. Not walking is cheating (so is appealing for LBW's when you also know it's not out though!!! - just cause it's league or club umpires and they love a trigger)

I've heard at least a million times 😀: any trick/cheat is allowed in Love and War!
Are we in Love or in War?

ProCricketer1982 · « **Reply #25 on:** April 15, 2021, 04:58:46 PM »

Quote from: AJ2014 on April 15, 2021, 04:56:24 PM

I've heard at least a million times 😀: any trick/cheat is allowed in Love and War!
Are we in Love or in War?

sport isn't war, not even close

brokenbat · « **Reply #26 on:** April 15, 2021, 06:18:48 PM »

Quote from: AJ2014 on April 15, 2021, 04:46:50 PM

That's a batsman talking here
A batsman knows 99% of the times he's nicked it or not.
Not talking about lbw, run out etc which comes with a doubt.
Jeffery Boycott said: when a batsman looks behind, that means he's nicked it!

Yes but the batsman cannot tell the umpire whether he�s nicked it or not. The fielder/keeper CAN tell the umpire if the catch/stumping is clean or not.

AJ2014 · « **Reply #27 on:** April 15, 2021, 06:41:54 PM »

Quote from: brokenbat on April 15, 2021, 06:18:48 PM

Yes but the batsman cannot tell the umpire whether he�s nicked it or not. The fielder/keeper CAN tell the umpire if the catch/stumping is clean or not.

Do you every time walk, when you nick it?
before umpire's finger🤔

procricket · « **Reply #28 on:** April 15, 2021, 07:17:19 PM »

I'm no chest but I don't walk ever it the umpire job to give me out not mine.

Call it cheating whatever them the rules my job to bat his is to make a decision however there one cabiat.. never moan about a bad decison as it his job and like players umpires make mistakes too

Jimbo · « **Reply #29 on:** April 15, 2021, 07:17:34 PM »

Quote from: ProCricketer1982 on April 15, 2021, 04:48:11 PM

I know every single time if I've hit it or not.. without fail. Not walking is cheating (so is appealing for LBW's when you also know it's not out though!!! - just cause it's league or club umpires and they love a trigger)

I imagine if we put this to a test with hotspot, snicko, etc we would find this is nonsense.

Only need to watch a few games worth of highlights to find batsmen reviewing ones they've feathered, do you think they believe they can 'beat' the technology? Or do you believe you're the only person in the history of the game who has never nicked one and not realised?

Author Topic: Lewis Mcmanus incident (Read 16186 times)

mo_town

Re: Lewis Mcmanus incident

AJ2014

Re: Lewis Mcmanus incident

brokenbat

Re: Lewis Mcmanus incident

ProCricketer1982

Re: Lewis Mcmanus incident

ProCricketer1982

Re: Lewis Mcmanus incident

ProCricketer1982

Re: Lewis Mcmanus incident

ProCricketer1982

Re: Lewis Mcmanus incident

AJ2014

Re: Lewis Mcmanus incident

ProCricketer1982

Re: Lewis Mcmanus incident

AJ2014

Re: Lewis Mcmanus incident

ProCricketer1982

Re: Lewis Mcmanus incident

brokenbat

Re: Lewis Mcmanus incident

AJ2014

Re: Lewis Mcmanus incident

procricket

Re: Lewis Mcmanus incident

Jimbo

Re: Lewis Mcmanus incident