*Official* Women's Cricket discussion thread

[mr_mister]

I guess in "defence" of her sheepish body language, she knew it would cause a shitstorm by doing it lol

Nobody is gonna mankad and act like it's a routine run of the mill dismissal

 

[honestbharani]

Ball wasn’t in play so couldn’t

Ball is in play once the bowler starts their run-up.

 

[Xix2565]

Why is it even a thing to pick on lol?

 

[honestbharani]

Cue every bowler who looked sheepish after getting the batter out off a long hop having to withdraw those wickets.

 

[honestbharani]

It's all good

Thanks a lot. I have no qualms admitting I did not show your degree of maturity there. You are a good one, even though I vehemently oppose your views on this.

 

[mr_mister]

Why is it even a thing to pick on lol?

well, the captain in the presser said something like "why are you even asking about it, why not ask about the 9 other dismissal"

that raised eyebrows with me because like, obviously she knows its gonna be headlines after Ashwin/Buttler. When even was the last one in international cricket? Was it Mankad?

And now we get Heather Knight saying the "warnings" were a complete lie. Why do they need to lie about warnings if there's no guilty conscience?


I dunno, watch this space. Things ain't over here.

 

[honestbharani]

You'll have to point out where exactly I mentioned the spirit of the game because I sure can't find it.

...

I'll repeat what I said a few months back: every sport needs written rules, but no sport has rules that are capable of standing up to the sort of insane rules lawyering scrutiny and loophole-searching that, you know, actual laws receive. As it stands the fact is that mankading is only allowed in the game because of this sort of unspoken honour code system that is nowhere codified in the rules that means that no one really does it and it looks way out of place when it happens, and everyone sort of agrees to handicap themselves by not exploiting this very plain opportunity opened by the laws to attempt to mankad someone on ~80% of deliveries.

Would it be entirely legal and professional if someone actually did attempt to play the sport according to the rules to their maximum extent and attempt to mankad at every single possibility? Of course. I don't see how you could argue that it's not within the rules to do so. Would that render the sport utterly and completely unwatchable and make me want to do, oh I don't know, literally any else with my spare time other than watch cricket? Obviously. No sport is ever designed to stand up to that level of "well it's in the rules" level of ruthless exploitation of loopholes.

I don't mind mankading but I think in their quest for internet points, a few people who I won't name but it should be pretty obvious are forgetting what "the laws of the game" are actually for. You need them, but they're necessarily downstream from the way the game is actually played. Cricket is a sport, not a constitutional government.

 

[honestbharani]

You'll have to point out where exactly I mentioned the spirit of the game because I sure can't find it.

..

yes... player who played the game says something happened in the game. Player who was nowhere near says it was not. I am sure the latter is right.

 

[mr_mister]

Thanks a lot. I have no qualms admitting I did not show your degree of maturity there. You are a good one, even though I vehemently oppose your views on this.

Thanks yeah, I can honestly say the only sustained animosity I've felt toward any posters here was against marc and lillianthomson when I first started posting, and I find them amusing now.

if it was the BCCI being a mob organisation jokes that pushed you to think how you did, just know I love drawing analogies between the mafia and any branch of power been watching too much Sopranos recently

 

[Xix2565]

well, the captain in the presser said something like "why are you even asking about it, why not ask about the 9 other dismissal"

that raised eyebrows with me because like, obviously she knows its gonna be headlines after Ashwin/Buttler. When even was the last one in international cricket? Was it Mankad?

And now we get Heather Knight saying the "warnings" were a complete lie. Why do they need to lie about warnings if there's no guilty conscience?


I dunno, watch this space. Things ain't over here.

To Harmanpreet, it obviously felt like she wanted more attention for her bowlers rather than the ending, which isn't something to be begrudged lol. They did a really good job for most of the innings and throughout the series. Imagine getting weirded out by people calling attention to stuff they want to discuss.

Heather Knight, once again, was not on the field. Why is the default assumption that Deepti was lying?

Shocking posting from you.

 

[mr_mister]

To Harmanpreet, it obviously felt like she wanted more attention for her bowlers rather than the ending, which isn't something to be begrudged lol. They did a really good job for most of the innings and throughout the series. Imagine getting weirded out by people calling attention to stuff they want to discuss.

Heather Knight, once again, was not on the field. Why is the default assumption that Deepti was lying?

Shocking posting from you.

eh, i'm just spewing things that enter my mind now, its 11pm here. Heather Knight could be wrong, I didn't say otherwise, there's no default assumption made there by me. We'l probably find out soon enough though - and I'm sure Dean would have at least spoke to her before she went and tweeted that. At this point i'm just enjoying the drama (though I do legitimately hate the mankad dismissal for reasons previously stated)

 

[Xix2565]

eh, i'm just spewing things that enter my mind now, its 11pm here. Heather Knight could be wrong, I didn't say otherwise, there's no default assumption made there by me. We'l probably find out soon enough though - and I'm sure Dean would have at least spoke to her before she went and tweeted that. At this point i'm just enjoying the drama (though I do legitimately hate the mankad dismissal for reasons previously stated)

...

And now we get Heather Knight saying the "warnings" were a complete lie. Why do they need to lie about warnings if there's no guilty conscience?

In what world does this sound like an unbiased statement?

 

[_00_deathscar]

if that had happened here all we'd be doing is laughing at the english batters.

I feel like this should still be the correct course of action

 

[mr_mister]

...

In what world does this sound like an unbiased statement?

so my thoughts were to your direct question about why does the sheepish body language matter - it is not really that important to my overall view on the matter but I gave my 2 cents. I'm happy to concede that's not really a huge issue, my main beef is with the act in the first place.

As for the unbiased statement, I dunno, I worded it poorly.

 

[RossTaylorsBox]

...

He's talking how the game is actually played, not "should" be played.

 

[Neil Young]

I like the fact that intrigue has been added to mystery, and someone is lying.

 

[mr_mister]

like i said earlier, Spark summed up everything very neatly for me. If I've strayed from that point too much throughout the day, put it down to not treating CW threads like legally binding discussions.

I get bored mid argument and make jokes, which is why I usually prefer to just make comments into the abyss of a thread rather than quote/quote/quote arguments

 

[Spark]

...

"The way the game is actually played" in that post has nothing to do with the "spirit of the game" and refers only to the point that the rules as formally set out are purely there to formalise and make consistent the game of cricket which exists entirely independently of what the ICC or MCC says The Laws Of The Game are.

It's why you can go down to the local park and set up a casual game with bat and ball with 5 friends, it's still fundamentally the same game.

I really don't know what point you're trying to argue against here.

 

[mr_mister]

that reminds me, what would Richard make of all this?

 

[Spark]

He's talking how the game is actually played, not "should" be played.

Right. My view is that mankading needs to be part of the game because otherwise non-strikers take way too many liberties, but a sport full of mankads would be unwatchable tripe and I'd find something better to do with my time.