Is the Golden Era of Oz Cricket Over?

[DoreSlamR]

Originally Posted by puts99

That is BS to say the least.. I'm fuming over here.

Now you can smack the wickets with your gloves and claim it was bowled.

Edit: Haddin would've known, theres just no way he wouldn't have. Since when can you put your hands infront of the wickets?! He's no Gilly thats for sure. :evil3:

I think the theory is if his gloves weren't there it would have taken the bails off.
Fortunately for NZ it didn't effect the outcome.


And I agree, Haddin is no Gilly, not by a long shot

[XR8putts]

Thank **** we won that.

We should've won that with 7 wickets in hand and in the 35th over, chasing 182 - NZ really, really made it hard for themselves, not helped by some rubbish umpiring and I don't know what to say of Haddin's role in a player getting bowled.

I think the theory is if his gloves weren't there it would have taken the bails off.

The ball clearly went into his gloves and his fingers hit the wicket, the ball missed the stumps. In all my years watching cricket I've never seen a keeper touch a ball before it has passed the stumps, have you? To Haddin's credit, atleast he let the batsman take a swing at the ball before he grabbed it. :togo:

I thought it was a terible game to watch, even though we won. Looking forward to Ryder opening the batting in the next game and hopefuly McCullum is allowed to bat more than two balls. After NZ's stunning performance in the field, this game was never Australia's to win, it was NZ's to lose - and they came damn close. Perth games suck, it's 2am!

[Rodp]

Originally Posted by prydey

a blind man did!! remember our home series with india last summer. andrew symonds smacked it through to the keeper and was given not out. 1 test later, tendulker smashed it into gilly's gloves and not called. pretty sure on both ocassions bucknor was umpire. as good as he may have been, he was dreadful then and in my opinion should be stood down. get the new guys in.

he actually was stood down because india threatened to take their bat and ball and go home.

There's been a long history between the Indian team and Bucknor though. They're genuinely of the opinion that Bucknor is racist against India and his decisions favour the opposition. While I don't subscribe wholly to the point of view that he's being racist, from my observations there does appear to be an inordinate amount of decisions by Bucknor consistantly favoring the team playing against India.

[DoreSlamR]

Originally Posted by puts99

The ball clearly went into his gloves and his fingers hit the wicket, the ball missed the stumps. In all my years watching cricket I've never seen a keeper touch a ball before it has passed the stumps, have you? To Haddin's credit, atleast he let the batsman take a swing at the ball before he grabbed it. :togo:

Will probably hear more about it tomorrow, and no I don't recall ever seeing a keeper taking the ball in front (or nearly in front) of the wicket.

[prydey]

you win some you lose some. the wicket involving haddin may have favoured australia but vetori was clearly run out but given not out.

thats the way the game goes.

[BZINGA]

Originally Posted by prydey

you win some you lose some. the wicket involving haddin may have favoured australia but vetori was clearly run out but given not out.

thats the way the game goes.

Exactly.

It was a shocking game made good too watch because of 2 ordinary teams. Hopefully friday we can see some decent hitting and some runs put on the board.

[IH8HSV]

Things arnt looking good for Australia after watching this game.

This is the weakest team Ive ever seen N.Z. ever have.

And not to mention 7 of these N.Z. players haven't even been to Australia to play before.

[Corzza]

Too many decisions that went very wrong

[gtxb67]

Originally Posted by prydey

but vetori was clearly run out but given not out

did vetori not hit the winning runs - it doesn't matter because australia never get dud decisions, it is only their opposition that do

[Bearman]

Golden era over?? I'd say so but there is no need for panic, we are still a very good side. Instead of being head and shoulders above all the other teams we've been brought back to the pack. Coupled with the emergence of very strong South African and Indian teams has compounded our situation. Also New Zealand has always been a pretty handy one day team as well!!

I would look seriously at rebuilding our test team as a priority. The time is right to identify good young cricketers (in their early 20's) and bring them on to become long term team players. Maybe use the older fringe players for the one day squad.

As for Twenty20 who gives a #&*(. That is glorified baseball, it's total and utter CRAP and has no place in cricket. All it does is divert our players from the REAL game, test cricket.

[Rodp]

Originally Posted by DoreSlamR

I think the theory is if his gloves weren't there it would have taken the bails off.
Fortunately for NZ it didn't effect the outcome.

There are no theories allowed when it comes to dismissals. There are defined rules and all have to be satisfied in order for the outcome to be dismissed fairly.

I've only read the match report about it (due to the apparent controversies) because quite frankly, pyjama cricket just doesn't do it for me.

Gilchrist has effected a number of stumpings by taking the ball before it has passed the stumps, which, if it hasn't hit the batsmen or the bat, doesn't satisfy the requirements of being given out stumped. It's not common but it does happen and should be given not out. I don't recall a stumping appeal given not out due to taking the ball before it has passed the stumps, though.

The report isn't quite clear about whether he took the ball before the stumps (the one I read suggested above the stumps) and if he broke the wicket before taking the ball or not. If he did then the only dismissal open for appeal would be stumped (or run out depending on what had happened prior).

The scenario seems to be that Haddin played at the ball before it passed the stumps, dislodged the bails but the ball may well have bowled the batsmen had he not interviened. Brain fart by Haddin, does not satisfy all rules for bowled or stumped. Not out.

Further, it brings into question the sportsmanship of Haddin. While it may be lineball as to whether he realised that he had taken the ball before the stumps in trying to effect a stumping, there's no doubt in my mind that he would have known that the batsmen wasn't bowled. He should have had a word to Ponting and attempted to have the batsmen recalled.

[prydey]

snicko showed zero movement on the d.hussey swing down leg side which was given out caught behind. there was a noise but in hindsight with the benefit of technology it obviously wasn't bat on ball. these decisions are part of the game and always have been. they are about to end though with england and west indies i think trialling a challenge system and when aust. tour rsa they will also trial a challenge system.

how many times do we bag the umpiring after seeing what he sees - the live action. i would say very rarely. normally its the slow replays that have us shaking our fist at the tv screen, a luxury the umpire doesn't have. obviously in this day and age there is technology there to assist but i believe they have to be careful how much they allow to interfere with the game. for one, i don't believe hawkeye to be that accurate. if it shows the ball clipping the outside mm of a stump or the very top of a bail, should that be given out? too much guessing, esp on a spinning ball. the umpires are all wired up. a quick chat with the 3rd or 4th ump to ask if it was inside edge or not may be all that is req and leave the rest up to the instincts of the ump. the challenge system will have a major effect on umpiring, just like in the tennis. very few overules by the umps in tennis these days. the same will happen with cricket. they will be a bit less involved on tight decisions and leave it up to players to decide whether or not they want to challenge.

i guess there is quite a bit riding on some games these days too which is one reason why a lot of people want the decisions to be as accurate as possible.

the fact that australia nearly made 181 runs be enough shows they are far from down and out just yet. nz have always been a good odi side.

[XR8putts]

From Cricinfo.com

Haddin calls 'cheat' claims poor and low

Daniel Vettori was disappointed Brad Haddin did not make an effort to prevent Neil Broom from leaving the field after the wicketkeeper dislodged the bails in a bowled dismissal in Perth. New Zealand went on to win the game on the last ball, but Broom's exit came at a critical time, ending his 42-run partnership with Ross Taylor.

Haddin's gloves were in front of the stumps and knocked off the bails, with Michael Clarke's delivery also appearing to head over the stumps. Neither umpire noticed Haddin's movement, which should have led to a no-ball, but it was clear on the replay.
"I think you saw from Haddin's reaction that he knew something was wrong so he probably should have made more noise about it," Vettori told NZPA after the win. "It is [disappointing] because I thought that was the partnership that was going to win the game, so it put us under a bit more pressure. We've just got to make sure it doesn't happen again."

Haddin called Vettori's response "poor" and "low", but maintained the ball hit the stumps before his gloves. "I'm pretty disappointed in Dan that he didn't have the decency to come and speak to me after the game if he had an issue with it rather than air his thoughts in a press conference," Haddin told AAP. "I think the polite or the decent thing to do would be to come and ask me. He's played a lot of cricket now and he knows too well what happens with these situations, so I thought it was a bit low. I think it's quite poor."

He said he was unaware at the time that his hands were ahead of the wickets. "After looking at the replay, my hands were in front of the stumps," he said. "But the ball, I'm 100% positive, hit the bails first and then came up into my gloves." Under the Laws, a no-ball should be called if the wicketkeeper does not stay behind the stumps until the ball touches the batsman, passes the stumps, or a run is attempted.

Ponting spoke before he had seen a replay but challenged Vettori to be sure of his Haddin criticism. "It's a bit much, he's basically claiming [Haddin's] a cheat, isn't he? That's a bit strong unless they're 100% certain.

"We'll wait and see. If [a replay] does show anything that Brad is in the clear, I'll certainly be letting Daniel know about it. It's probably worth Haddin having a chat to him as well. He's basically had a bit of a crack at Haddin's make-up."

Haddin told Ponting the ball had hit the top of off stump. "The umpire gave it out and the batsman walked off, and the next I heard of it was when I was asked about it at the end of play," Ponting said. "[Haddin] obviously didn't know, because if he knew then he wouldn't have claimed it. Whatever we're saying about Brad Haddin here, you can't say that knowingly happened, that is for sure."

Ponting's night grew worse when he was fined 20% of his match fee after being two overs behind the required rate. The rest of the team received 10% punishments. Australia get the chance to hit back in the second match of the Chappell-Hadlee Series in Melbourne on Friday.

So is Ponting still going to have a few words to Vetori still? Apologise perhaps?

This video shows it clear as day. Just watch the slow-mo(s).

How Haddin continues to claim innocence is ridiculous. Ponting should get his facts straight before he shoots his mouth off.

[Rodp]

Originally Posted by puts99

From Cricinfo.com



So is Ponting still going to have a few words to Vetori still? Apologise perhaps?

This video shows it clear as day. Just watch the slow-mo(s).

How Haddin continues to claim innocence is ridiculous. Ponting should get his facts straight before he shoots his mouth off.

Just watched it, that is exceptionally poor wicket keeping and poor sportsmanship.

*At best* the ball may have nicked the bail had Haddin's gloves not been in the way but that's beside the point, Haddin's gloves broke the wicket. Haddin would have had to have questioned himself as to whether it was a fair dismissal at the time and he should have spoken up, IMO... he would have had to have known.

Broom as he was walking off appeared to be looking at both umpires, suggesting that he felt the dismissal was marginal and hoping for either a recall or a 3rd umpire review.

Without looking at the terms of play it may not have been an option for the onfield umpires to have sent that decision upstairs and relied on the 3rd umpire. Square leg should have had a reasonable view of it though and done something!

[Corzza]

Originally Posted by Rodp

Just watched it, that is exceptionally poor wicket keeping and poor sportsmanship.

*At best* the ball may have nicked the bail had Haddin's gloves not been in the way but that's beside the point, Haddin's gloves broke the wicket. Haddin would have had to have questioned himself as to whether it was a fair dismissal at the time and he should have spoken up, IMO... he would have had to have known.

Broom as he was walking off appeared to be looking at both umpires, suggesting that he felt the dismissal was marginal and hoping for either a recall or a 3rd umpire review.

Without looking at the terms of play it may not have been an option for the onfield umpires to have sent that decision upstairs and relied on the 3rd umpire. Square leg should have had a reasonable view of it though and done something!

Yeah that is poor sportsmanship.

If anything hw should have appealed for caught behind.

[DoreSlamR]

Originally Posted by puts99

How Haddin continues to claim innocence is ridiculous. Ponting should get his facts straight before he shoots his mouth off.

I don't see where Ponting is shooting his mouth off, while admitting to not seeing the footage yet, he's still going to defend his team mate isn't he?
What would you expect him to do?

We'll probably never know if Haddin is lying or not, it's happened, it got missed by the umpires and there is nothing that can be done about it.

Except maybe the umpires will watch Haddin more closely now.

[Rodp]

Originally Posted by DoreSlamR

I don't see where Ponting is shooting his mouth off, while admitting to not seeing the footage yet, he's still going to defend his team mate isn't he?
What would you expect him to do?

I don't feel Ponting is shooting his mouth off but the prudent thing to have said would have been something along the lines of... 'I'd need to see the replay before I can comment on the incident...'

Bear in mind, Vettori had spent plenty of time in the shed viewing slo-mo replays and IMO, seems a fair minded player so it wouldn't be in his nature to critisise Haddin's actions without clear evidence.

[XR8putts]

Originally Posted by DoreSlamR

I don't see where Ponting is shooting his mouth off, while admitting to not seeing the footage yet, he's still going to defend his team mate isn't he?
What would you expect him to do?

Perhaps wait untill he has seen the footage, instead of planning to approach Vetori to tell him how wrong he was.

Originally Posted by DoreSlamR

We'll probably never know if Haddin is lying or not

Um, you might not - the rest of the cricketing world does.

Anyway, I'm looking forward to Friday as it should be a good game, I just hope it's not as painful to watch as the first game was. NZ news is reporting Jesse Ryder is coming home due to his injury.. argh.

[DoreSlamR]

Originally Posted by puts99

Perhaps wait untill he has seen the footage, instead of planning to approach Vetori to tell him how wrong he was.


Um, you might not - the rest of the cricketing world does.

Anyway, I'm looking forward to Friday as it should be a good game, I just hope it's not as painful to watch as the first game was. NZ news is reporting Jesse Ryder is coming home due to his injury.. argh.

True, there is more than one way to skin a cat

What I mean about Haddin lying or not is that he is claiming the ball hit the bails first. The replays do seem to show otherwise but he may genuinely believe the ball did hit the bails first.

Anywho...bring on friday night! :

[prydey]

how many guys here have kept wicket? how many guys here have had keeping gloves on and had 'feelin' at the end of them?

i've seen the replays, and yes, i agree it was a no ball, however its a bit rich to crucify haddin when there is a chance he genuinely didn't know what he'd done.

does anyone think if the roles were reversed and it was australia chasing a measly nz total and macullum (sp) stuffed up that the outcome would've been any different. no one on field got another look at it. by the time the batsmen looked even it was all over. all so easy to judge with the benefit of replays.

it would frustrate me but i wonder how different the reactions would be if they stopped playing replays at all. we see what the umpire sees. live action, one time.

there were some rough decisions for australia too. d.hussey didn't hit the ball according to snicko but given out. replays also seem to show vettori fractionally short of his ground and given not out. this is part of cricket.

lets just hope austalia can show up with more than 2 batsmen and 2 bowlers in melbourne.

[gtxb67]

Originally Posted by Rodp

Haddin would have had to have questioned himself as to whether it was a fair dismissal at the time and he should have spoken up, IMO... he would have had to have known

very true, at best he could not have known whether it was a true dismissal or not. you would think with so many cameras, that even if honesty was not his number one priority that he would have said something so as not to be called a cheat

and as has been suggested, ricky should have said, "he would have to look at the replay first". did he think that vettori had not already seen it or did he think vettori was lying

poor form all round and if it was another keeper doing that, i would have called him a cheat, so at present i do not have many nice things to say about haddin - except he isn't the first and he won't be the last - unfortunately

[BZINGA]

After being a wicket keeper for many years, when wearing inners and gloves you dont get that fine touch feeling as the padding is very thick too stop the sting of the ball, he wouldnt of felt the bails break and but only would've felt the ball hit the gloves. Honest mistake by him but it happened and lets move on.

[Rodp]

Originally Posted by prydey

how many guys here have kept wicket? how many guys here have had keeping gloves on and had 'feelin' at the end of them?

Kept for 10 years playing outdoor and indoor cricket and have a few mangled fingers and weird crap I can do with my left thumb that I've dislocated more times than I like to imagine to prove it.

If you watch the replay, he comes up with the ball (good) then starts reaching for it (bad) which is very poor technique when keeping to a spinner.

Could he feel his gloves breaking the wicket? Depends. Contact between gloves and wicket was almost simultaneous with gloves and ball. However, a keeper of his experience should never have reached infront of the wicket to attempt to take a ball. At the very least I would have thought there was an element of doubt in his mind but there's only one person that knows and that's Haddin.

Originally Posted by prydey

does anyone think if the roles were reversed and it was australia chasing a measly nz total and macullum (sp) stuffed up that the outcome would've been any different. no one on field got another look at it.

Impossible to tell but you seem to be suggesting that McCullum would cheat if his team's score was low enough...?

Players have to be mindful of the scrutiny of 50 cameras trained in on the action. Some players seemingly thought they could get away with it, others don't.

Would Gilchrist have decided to become a walker if there was no such thing as a replay? Who knows.

Originally Posted by prydey

there were some rough decisions for australia too. d.hussey didn't hit the ball according to snicko but given out. replays also seem to show vettori fractionally short of his ground and given not out. this is part of cricket.

Neither decision put the integrity of the player in question, though.

[msman]

law 40 section d- limitations to the wicketkeeper.
wicketkeeper must remain behind the stumps, even his fingertips, during delivery of the ball.
you can check for yourself,
http://www.lords.org/laws-and-spirit...03,434,AR.html
page 121.

it should of been a no ball.
i believe haddin when he says he thinks the ball hit the wicket first as already stated feeling in hands with kepper gloves is nothing. but a top level wicketkeeper not knowing where his hands are??? also the most basic of things taught is not to thrust your hands forward.

if you saw the game you'll see hadding goes to celebrate than stops after 2-3 steps he knows something is wrong. when was the last time you didn't see a keeper rape the bowler after a wicket? especially in a tight game.
watch the replays below
http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=8aVbb8QkO2w
by a pom whos just a little bitter i think.
http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=iBv4gq72p4M
better quality

also with m.hussey's dismissal any keeper would go up for it.
its part of the game for mistakes to be made with snicks and runouts etc, but when someone blatantly cheats for a wicket its just not cricket.
what would have happened if it was say a pakistani keeper and the last aussie batsman in a tight run chase?

[prydey]

Originally Posted by Rodp

Impossible to tell but you seem to be suggesting that McCullum would cheat if his team's score was low enough...?

i'm not suggesting for one moment that McCullum would 'cheat' as i'm of the opinion that haddin didn't 'cheat'.

all i'm saying is you are in a tight run chase with a wicket imperative and all of a sudden there is one. i don't believe in judging players on slow motion replays. no one out on the field gets that benefit. there are 2 umpires, 1 at square leg and the batsman was given out. there were no questions of doubt 'on the field'. there is a challenge system coming but until it does, let the umpires do their job.

in my opinion, gilly has opened a can of worms with this 'walking' thing. i applaude gilly for walking but now every tom, dick and harry thinks that if you don't walk, you are a cheat, which is wrong! gilly walked when he batted and yet appealed for everything behind the stumps...inconsistant.
if you interview all the cricketers of past era's you will find that MOST will play the umpire, not walk.

sure, in hindsight, haddin could've put his hand up and said 'ooh i think i might've stuffed up there, you might want to refer that one', but he didn't because i believe he was unaware that his gloves broke the stumps.

how many people called it 'not out' BEFORE they saw a replay?? seriously!

[gtxb67]

i find it hard to believe that anyone who has the skill to hit a ball to all parts of the ground in less than .5 second can not know where their hands are in relation to the stumps. these guys do not need the replay (same as any real sport), they know where the ball is going both from the bowlers hand and off the bat, they know when someone is lbw or caught behind. sure sometimes they appeal for some bad ones, but to have your hands in front of the stumps and breaking them with your hand is an amateur mistake. once again, he is not the first, but that doesn't mean i consider the others not to have cheated - it will be interesting to see what the media make of it, because the other two prominent players (not keepers, one bowler and one batsmen) to do it were considered fair by all of the media, when to me they were not

[XR8putts]

The New Zealand media have been calling Haddin a cheat, but moreso because of his words the next morning. Ricky Ponting has been getting flack too. You only have to go to a site like Cricinfo.com to see what impartial countries are making of it, and it's not in Haddin's favour. The NZ media have been calling the BlackCaps a club-side ever since the team was regarded as such by Aussie media prior to the first game. Not a bad effort from a club-side in my opinion.

Lets just move on from the Haddin incident and look forward to the next ODI.

[prydey]

Originally Posted by puts99

Lets just move on from the Haddin incident and look forward to the next ODI.

Agreed! anyone would think its the first controversy in world cricket. umpire gave it out. end of story.

[Rodp]

Originally Posted by prydey

sure, in hindsight, haddin could've put his hand up and said 'ooh i think i might've stuffed up there, you might want to refer that one', but he didn't because i believe he was unaware that his gloves broke the stumps.

how many people called it 'not out' BEFORE they saw a replay?? seriously!

How about his awareness of the wicket and where his gloves were?

Watch the youtube clip above again, watch how he rises with the ball, his hands tucked behind the stumps and the moment he clears the stumps his hands push forward beyond the stumps. I can't believe a keeper of his experience wasn't aware that his gloves were beyond the stumps. There's two issues I see, one is that he broke the stumps and the second is that he was attempting to take the ball before the stumps. IMO, that is indefensible.

[Hords]

Nothing like a bit of controversy.

No one made a fuss when Warne was caught on 99 off a Vetorri no ball!