• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Bairstow Dismissal

Was the Bairstow dismissal against the spirit of the game?

  • Yes

    Votes: 24 28.6%

  • No

    Votes: 60 71.4%
  • Total voters
    84
a massive zebra

a massive zebra

International Captain
It was obviously out as per the laws of the game. The umpires are there to apply the laws and the players are there to play within the laws of the game. They all did so.

If there is a common consensus that a certain law needs changing, change the law and the umpires can then apply the new law from the date of the rule change. I don't think there should be some separate standard that is expected of the players but not clearly defined in the laws, because where do you draw the line? The biased English commentators, Stuart Broad and MCC members were complaining that this dismissal is against the spirit of the game. Yet they were not complaining when Stokes was incorrectly awarded four runs for the deflection in the world cup final and didn't ask for the runs to be rescinded. Your interpretation of the spirit of the game in a given situation is driven by your own personal biases. It is an obsolete ethos which has been inherited from a time when the game was ruled by amateur gentlemen.

So I disagree with the essence of your question. The spirit of the game should be forgotten and should have no impact on the proceedings of a cricket match. If you don't like the laws, and most people agree, change them.
 
Last edited:
honestbharani

honestbharani

Whatever it takes!!!
To try and discuss this a bit more rationally, I dont think anyone is arguing that Bairstow did not try to hit the stumps when the Aussie batsmen were batting, but a. the incident I saw on twitter was a batsman completing his stroke and b. It seems Stokes and England are saying they would have withdrawn the appeal if the batsman was not attempting to take a run or completing his stroke.

For me, it was very stupid from Bairstow. And I can see why people think Aussies should have withdrawn their appeal. If I was the captain, I might have withdrawn the appeal but it also depends on game stage etc.

Its just easier for anyone to not be stupid themselves instead of awaiting mercies of others' thoughts. Also, it may have just added a bit of a personal touch and I hope it spurs England on to better performances and win the next 2 tests so that we can enjoy a great final test as a neutral.
 
Uppercut

Uppercut

Request Your Custom Title Now!
I must be getting old because 10 years ago I'd have loved it and now I don't. I just don't think it's good cricket for the fielding side to get batsmen out stumped talking to their partner at the end of the over. The game is in a worse place when that's a part of it. There's no right answer, that's just how I feel about it.

Love the drama though. I totally disagree with people who want to scrap the idea of a spirit of cricket. So many of the sport's most interesting stories come out of it.
 
GIMH

GIMH

Norwood's on Fire
Like a few have said, Stokes probably goes into God mode regardless, but the sheer entertainment of Broad’s response to it was gold
 
Line and Length

Line and Length

Cricketer Of The Year
Acceptable and within the laws today.

Unacceptable in my playing days as 'spirit if the game' ruled over the laws of the game.
 
BoyBrumby

BoyBrumby

Englishman
Uppercut said:
I must be getting old because 10 years ago I'd have loved it and now I don't. I just don't think it's good cricket for the fielding side to get batsmen out stumped talking to their partner at the end of the over. The game is in a worse place when that's a part of it. There's no right answer, that's just how I feel about it.

Love the drama though. I totally disagree with people who want to scrap the idea of a spirit of cricket. So many of the sport's most interesting stories come out of it.
Click to expand...
Pretty much how I feel about it. Aussies didn't cheat, but it felt a little cheap.

Speaking of which, possibly the thing that aggrieves me most is that Green gets credited with a wicket. We've all seen bowlers get spawny wickets with tripe, but this felt as if it was literally eff all to do with him.
 
GIMH

GIMH

Norwood's on Fire
I’ve not seen a single ‘Bairstow did this’ example yet that has actually been the same.
 
honestbharani

honestbharani

Whatever it takes!!!
I heard something interesting when I was visiting York. It is apparently still legal for you guys to kill a Scotsman in that city? Is that true?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top