The England Cricket Thread

Participant said:
Well I'm glad they didn't listen to pitchfork-brandishing teeth nashers like you, because it would have deprived us of someone that will be the greatest batsman of his generation, for what was really a fairly menial indiscretion.
Click to expand...

It would have had nothing to do with me, he would have brought it upon himself.

I'd rather watch someone less talented with a bit of integrity than someone at the top of his game who is a known cheat. Some people still consider integrity to be an important aspect of sport, clearly you don't.
 
Last edited:
McBain said:
It would have had nothing to do with me, he would have brought it upon himself.

I'd rather watch someone less talented with a bit of integrity than someone at the top of his game who is a known cheat. Some people still consider integrity to be an important aspect of sport, clearly you don't.
Click to expand...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/cricket/7579005.stm

Using mints to illegally boost the shine of the ball is just as bad as using sandpaper to illegally roughen up the ball, both are classed as ball tampering. Stop being a sheep, loads of people have ball tampered before and loads will do it in the future.

At the time of the incident the maximum punishment from the ICC for ball tampering was 1 test, it's now 6 tests but Smith missed double that as Cricket Australia went OTT on their punishment.

Ultimately he made a mistake, he's done his time and now he deserves a 2nd chance and quite frankly, cricket fans around the world deserve to see him.
 
Locky said:
More than that. This is going to be 5-0...
Click to expand...

I don't listen to your predictions anymore.....the other week during the World Cup Final all you did is put down their chances on numerous occasions throughout the match, totally giving up on any optimism.....and what happened?? :p:D
 
Monkeymatt said:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/cricket/7579005.stm

Using mints to illegally boost the shine of the ball is just as bad as using sandpaper to illegally roughen up the ball, both are classed as ball tampering. Stop being a sheep, loads of people have ball tampered before and loads will do it in the future.

At the time of the incident the maximum punishment from the ICC for ball tampering was 1 test, it's now 6 tests but Smith missed double that as Cricket Australia went OTT on their punishment.

Ultimately he made a mistake, he's done his time and now he deserves a 2nd chance and quite frankly, cricket fans around the world deserve to see him.
Click to expand...

It wasn't a spontaneous mistake he didn't even touch the ball. We're talking about the planning, the pre meditation, the intent to cheat. He was the Captain, the person who should have stopped it yet he knowingly allowed it to happen.

It's nothing to do with being a sheep, it's about basic morals. He was in a position where he should have been upholding the integrity of the game instead he chose to cheat to win rather than play fairly. He doesn't deserve a second chance at all Imo, he should be done. Cheating at the highest level of sport should be one shot and done, just like PEDs should be.

Warner is even worse, getting someone else to do the dirty work. But hey, all three of them will always have an asterisk against their names I suppose that will have to be enough.
 
Last edited:
McBain said:
It wasn't a spontaneous mistake he didn't even touch the ball. We're talking about the planning, the pre meditation, the intent to cheat. He was the Captain, the person who should have stopped it yet he knowingly allowed it to happen.

It's nothing to do with being a sheep, it's about basic morals. He was in a position where he should have been upholding the integrity of the game instead he chose to cheat to win rather than play fairly. He doesn't deserve a second chance at all Imo, he should be done. Cheating at the highest level of sport should be one shot and done, just like PEDs should be.

Warner is even worse, getting someone else to do the dirty work. But hey, all three of them will always have an asterisk against their names I suppose that will have to be enough.
Click to expand...

Again you're ignoring the main point I keep trying to drill into you. Trescothick and possibly other members of the England '05 Ashes team planned and premeditated and a plan to cheat by ball tampering and didn't get any punishment, Faf Du Plessis did likewise and got a fine but didn't miss any games. If Cricket Australia had left the punishment to the ICC then he would have been banned for one game. Why are you so obsessed with these three when so many others have cheated in the same way and received a far smaller/no punishment at all?

I'm just waiting for you to peddle out the "spirit of cricket" nonsense that people who talk of the "integrity of the game" and "morals" use! If we're going to start banning everybody who cheats, what about all the batsmen who nick behind and don't walk? The fielders who claim grounded catches? What about teams that ping the ball straight into the ground from in close to rough it up?

Evangelion said:
You can call it plenty of things, but you absolutely cannot call it a mistake. It was deliberate and premeditated.
Click to expand...

Smith's role in it was a mistake. Warner came up with the idea, Bancroft actually acted upon it, Smith either made a bad call by not nipping the behaviour in the bud, or wasn't a strong enough character to stand up to Warner. Either way Smith wasn't a good captain and so it makes sense that Australia have banned him from becoming captain again for a while. It doesn't make him the worst bloke to have ever played Cricket as some seem to believe.

EDIT: Root gone now and I think the match is lost now. The fact that Lyon bowled, and probably batted, far better than Moeen and Jimmy only bowling 4 overs all test have hurt us hard.
 
I don't think the tactic of booing Smith has been as successful as England supporters had hoped.

Monkeymatt said:
what about all the batsmen who nick behind and don't walk?
Click to expand...

*cough*Broad*cough*

Smith's role in it was a mistake. Warner came up with the idea, Bancroft actually acted upon it, Smith either made a bad call by not nipping the behaviour in the bud, or wasn't a strong enough character to stand up to Warner.
Click to expand...

I can't call this a mistake, the captain is supposed to maintain discipline. Failing to act (for whatever reason) is not a mere mistake.

Either way Smith wasn't a good captain and so it makes sense that Australia have banned him from becoming captain again for a while. It doesn't make him the worst bloke to have ever played Cricket as some seem to believe.
Click to expand...

I agree with that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom