**Official** New Zealand in Australia

[_Ed_]

What a crock of ****. I just watched the youtube clip of this and it sounds like the ball hit the stump to me...unless Haddins gloves are hard enough to make a sound similar. Obviously, the issue is that his gloves were infront of the stumps and may well have clipped the bails before the ball hits, which they shouldn't have been...but 'blatant cheating'. I think you're gripping too tightly.

But how can the ball have hit the stump before his gloves, if his gloves were in front of the stumps?

 

[KiWiNiNjA]

What a crock of ****. I just watched the youtube clip of this and it sounds like the ball hit the stump to me...unless Haddins gloves are hard enough to make a sound similar. Obviously, the issue is that his gloves were infront of the stumps and may well have clipped the bails before the ball hits, which they shouldn't have been...

Hard to imagine how it hit the stumps as well as land in Haddin's gloves considering his gloves were in front of the stumps when he caught the ball.

but 'blatant cheating'. I think you're gripping too tightly.

Yeah, zinzan was going over the top. With the "blatant cheating" part, but most of us probably can't be bothered going through that all again.

If he deliberately bumped the stump with his hand or knee and then appealed THAT would be blatant cheating. Anyone sound of mind can see he's not sure...but isn't it possible he assumed it was ok when the square leg umpire didn't do anything about it? I don't know how anyone can say he'd know exactly what happened when he's preparing to collect the ball at around the same time it comes into contact with the wicket. How would he know whether he hit the bail with his glove, or the bail hit his glove after being dislodged by the ball?

It's this bit that is causing all the fuss, considering Haddin came out and has claimed that he was 100% certain that it was bowled. Not to mention the fact that now he has hit back at Vettori for calling him a cheat when he didn't.

Sorry for coming in and trying to talk little bit of sense...I'll let you get back to the hysterics and name-calling now.

Might pay to read the thread first, don't you think?

 

[biased indian]

What a crock of ****. I just watched the youtube clip of this and it sounds like the ball hit the stump to me...unless Haddins gloves are hard enough to make a sound similar. Obviously, the issue is that his gloves were infront of the stumps and may well have clipped the bails before the ball hits, which they shouldn't have been...but 'blatant cheating'. I think you're gripping too tightly.

If he deliberately bumped the stump with his hand or knee and then appealed THAT would be blatant cheating. Anyone sound of mind can see he's not sure...but isn't it possible he assumed it was ok when the square leg umpire didn't do anything about it?

he could have just said that i am not sure. the batsmen did have doubt when you see the keeper in big celebration huddle he things ok so i am bowled ...surely haddin should have said that oki am not sure about it....

 

[_Ed_]

Might pay to read the thread first, don't you think?

That's a pretty big ask now, we've been going on like this for quite a few pages!

 

[KiWiNiNjA]

That's a pretty big ask now, we've been going on like this for quite a few pages!

True true, but "I'll let you get back to the hysterics and name-calling now" is a bit rich if you haven't even read the thread.

 

[Son Of Coco]

I can't help but steal someone's dissection of Haddin's comments on another forum:



Puts a whole new perspective on modern cricket. It must have been a mystery ball.

I think what they've missed is that it's a no ball if the gloves are infront of the stumps during delivery...I don't think you'll find a keeper of international standard anywhere in the world who moves his gloves towards the ball as it's coming at him. Haddin's fingertips look to have been infront of the stumps when the ball was delivered, but he's clearly moving them towards his body in preparation to take the ball when he clips the bails. So he could well have clipped the bails and still taken the ball level with the stumps or behind them. It certainly sounds like the ball clips the stumps on the replay at normal speed. What this person has said is great if you want to accuse Haddin of cheating, but it seems to lack common sense or knowledge of how the keeper takes the ball...and I'd guess it's deliberate in an attempt to make their point.

The guy shouldn't have been out, but the way some people are carrying out about what he 'should have known' etc is pretty ridiculous.

 

[Johnners]

Voges seemed to be a pretty clean hitter when he played in the series over here, maybe he's there to do a Morkel-ish role in the batting powerplay?

Striking at late 60s this season in the FRC

Has generally had to come in after Ronchi and Pomersbach combined for a total of 2, though.

Hmm, that's that theory gone.

Haha, was thinking the same then.....

D'oh.

He Didn't break the record for the fastest Domestic OD ton by poking it around for singles. Made an awesome century coming in at 3 down for 20 odd to guide WA to a win against SA earlier in the season as well, striking at around 80. Will certainly be an improvement down the order compared to say Hopes (should Voges bat that low).

 

[_Ed_]

It certainly sounds like the ball clips the stumps on the replay at normal speed.

That could have been the sound of the bail knocking the top of the stump as it was dislodged, I've heard sounds like that when a gust of wind blows the bails off.

 

[Son Of Coco]

Hard to imagine how it hit the stumps as well as land in Haddin's gloves considering his gloves were in front of the stumps when he caught the ball.

Yeah, zinzan was going over the top. With the "blatant cheating" part, but most of us probably can't be bothered going through that all again.

It's this bit that is causing all the fuss, considering Haddin came out and has claimed that he was 100% certain that it was bowled. Not to mention the fact that now he has hit back at Vettori for calling him a cheat when he didn't.

Might pay to read the thread first, don't you think?

Not at all, have you ever seen a keeper worth his salt who doesn't move his gloves towards his body to take the ball? His gloves may have started in front of the stumps but they didn't stay there. If they did he wouldn't have knocked off the bails.

I read the thread...it's the same old same old when this happens. I certainly expected it to be a hell of a lot more blatant than it was reading some of the comments in here. And I was referring more to Zinzan's comments than everyone elses...but it gets slightly ridiculous at times. If you can't understand how it could happen without him knowing fully that he clipped thebails then there's not much that can be done I'm afraid. Sure, he probably should have said something...but as I said, he may have assumed the umpire saying nothing meant it was ok. There are a number of instances in almost every game where a player could say something when he's not sure of a dismissal but it doesn't happen.

 

[_Ed_]

Sure, he probably should have said something...but as I said, he may have assumed the umpire saying nothing meant it was ok. There are a number of instances in almost every game where a player could say something when he's not sure of a dismissal but it doesn't happen.

But do they always come out and say they were "100% certain"?

 

[Son Of Coco]

That could have been the sound of the bail knocking the top of the stump as it was dislodged, I've heard sounds like that when a gust of wind blows the bails off.

It might have been...it was pretty loud though. At normal speed I would have assumed it hit the stump, it's only in replay that things get a little murkier.

 

[KiWiNiNjA]

common sense or knowledge of how the keeper takes the ball...and I'd guess it's deliberate in an attempt to make their point.

The guy shouldn't have been out, but the way some people are carrying out about what he 'should have known' etc is pretty ridiculous.

A keeper shouldn't have his gloves in front of the wickets, which also goes against this. So you can throw so-called "common sense" out the window.

The fact is that the ball is in his gloves while his gloves are over top of the wickets.

 

[Son Of Coco]

But do they always come out and say they were "100% certain"?

Probably not Although saying 'I'm 100% certain it hit the stump' could be correct, he might just be leaving out the last part where he could add 'after my gloves did'.

 

[_Ed_]

With regard to where his gloves are when he takes the ball, look at 0:38 here - http://nz.youtube.com/watch?v=iBv4gq72p4M.

To me it looks like the bails are dislodged after he takes the ball, as he brings his arms back toward his body.

 

[HeathDavisSpeed]

But do they always come out and say they were "100% certain"?

Its a vast improvement over "I'm going to give 10000%" or whatever it was.

 

[KiWiNiNjA]

Not at all, have you ever seen a keeper worth his salt who doesn't move his gloves towards his body to take the ball? His gloves may have started in front of the stumps but they didn't stay there. If they did he wouldn't have knocked off the bails.

I read the thread...it's the same old same old when this happens. I certainly expected it to be a hell of a lot more blatant than it was reading some of the comments in here. And I was referring more to Zinzan's comments than everyone elses...but it gets slightly ridiculous at times. If you can't understand how it could happen without him knowing fully that he clipped thebails then there's not much that can be done I'm afraid. Sure, he probably should have said something...but as I said, he may have assumed the umpire saying nothing meant it was ok. There are a number of instances in almost every game where a player could say something when he's not sure of a dismissal but it doesn't happen.

Fair enough.

Yeah, its really the "100% thing" and subsequent slamming of Vettori that I'm more disappointed with.

Unfortunately, he had his chance to say he had even the slightest doubt. His captain has backed him up on his original story, and he has caused a fuss over the opposition captains comments, taking them out of context. Going back on the 100% comment is impossible now.

 

[Johnners]

With regard to where his gloves are when he takes the ball, look at 0:38 here - http://nz.youtube.com/watch?v=iBv4gq72p4M.

To me it looks like the bails are dislodged after he takes the ball, as he brings his arms back toward his body.

Doesn't look like the ball ever hits the stumps to me. Only possibility is if it has hit the top of off, but the bails are already broken then...

 

[Son Of Coco]

A keeper shouldn't have his gloves in front of the wickets, which also goes against this. So you can throw so-called "common sense" out the window.

The fact is that the ball is in his gloves while his gloves are over top of the wickets.

Exactly, and I said that to being with. The guy shouldn't have been out. But his gloves were infront to start with...it doesn't mean they stayed there and on replay I can't see any reason why the ball couldn't have clipped the top of the stump and ended up in his gloves...they're not infront of the stumps. In watching the replay again I think he broke the bails with his fingertips as the ball went into his gloves and it actually passed over the top. Suggesting he could have known this though is the ridiculous part...he didn't do it in slow motion.

Let's not forget you take the ball in the middle of the gloves, not the fingertips. It's not impossible that he thought the ball hit the bails on the way through.

 

[Precambrian]

Okay here I've got 4 screenshots.

No.1 :

Haddin's hands are in front of the stumps already, even before the ball has passed the batsman, and hence there is no way that is NOT a no-ball.

Screenshot No. 2

The exact moment when the ball enters Haddin's gloves, note how far they are from the bails/stumps, and also note that Haddin's hands are still in front of the stumps.

Screenshot No.3

Another view of the "exact" moment when the ball enters Haddin's gloves, again, confirms he took the ball before the stumps, which means, there is no way the ball had hit the bails before they entered his gloves, or otherwise, Laws of physics had a temporary breakdown at the stumps area at that very precise moment, and somehow caused the ball to pass through Haddin's gloves, hit the bails, and then somehow pop back into his gloves in the reverse motion.

Screenshot No.4

The best confirmation of Haddin grabbing the ball in front of the stumps, as well as his lower gloves are in touch with the top of the stumps.

So two questions to Haddin:

1. How did you even dare to make that argument that the ball clipped the bails and then popped into the stumps?

2. How can you question Vettori speaking to the presspeople, when Haddin refuted the suggestions in front of the same people?

 

[mccullum42]

Doesn't look like the ball ever hits the stumps to me. Only possibility is if it has hit the top of off, but the bails are already broken then...

Yeah the replay at the 58 second mark or around then shows that it is over the top of off stump and that he has hit the stump before he even catches the ball - which you can see from the side on angle