A cheat is a cheat

[the big bambino]

So sensitive

Every criticism of Australia is rebutted with one from another country

Fascinating

I find the so called rebuttals overly precious

Matthews did not claim it. He was unsure if it carried and asked the umpire. This has been pointed out to you before yet you keep lying. Trying the age old truth by repetition tactic I see. Typical aussie.

Also Waugh literally picked it up off the ground. This has also been pointed out before.

And there in lies your hypocrisy. Waugh said he thought it was a catch and you claim he was cheating because it suits your prejudices.

Matthews’ actions effectively caused a referral which in the age of drs is a claim of a catch. But as the commentary said the ball clearly bounced. Clearly! If you applied the same standard as Waugh you would say he should have known and waved it away. But you don’t because on this occasion it’s inconvenient for your prejudices.

 

[OverratedSanity]

He clearly didn't know lmao. Yeah right.

 

[StephenZA]

Matthews’ actions effectively caused a referral which in the age of drs is a claim of a catch. But as the commentary said the ball clearly bounced. Clearly! If you applied the same standard as Waugh you would say he should have known and waved it away. But you don’t because on this occasion it’s inconvenient for your prejudices.

Of because Mathews knows that technology exists he may as well ask for it to be checked?

Every country has had dodgy cricketers that tried to get away with it... nothing new here. It's the fans that make excuses for those cricketers behaviour and the countries who believe their **** doesn't smell that is sad.

 

[Daemon]

I find the so called rebuttals overly precious

I agree, OS is a distasteful individual at the best of times

Doesn't change the three facts though

Also just seen the Harper-Bevan one. So bad. There's a Shehzad one that's hilariously awful as well.

 

[the big bambino]

That’s what he said but of course he didn’t have the benefit of a replay at the time or the chip on his shoulder to stew over it all these years.

Edit. This for OS. Gee this threads moving quickly.

 

[the big bambino]

Of because Mathews knows that technology exists he may as well ask for it to be checked?

Every country has had dodgy cricketers that tried to get away with it... nothing new here. It's the fans that make excuses for those cricketers behaviour and the countries who believe their **** doesn't smell that is sad.

In Waugh’s day it didn’t so you could only appeal right?

Your second para is a lazy argument and is a substitute for a considered one. I reject your implication and have not made excuses for the sandpaper trio on any grounds let alone parochialism. Waugh said he thought he caught it and it his right to appeal. No one has any evidence to contradict his belief wasn’t genuine. Therefore the insistence that it wasn’t is parochial.

 

[Spark]

I remember the Shezhad one. One of the funnier things I've seen in the game

 

[StephenZA]

In Waugh’s day it didn’t so you could only appeal right?

I never talked about Waugh, only Waugh will ever know for sure. I said why Mathews probably did what he did so comparing the two is pointless. Waugh may have very well ask for the referral in this day an age, under similar circumstances.

Your second para is a lazy argument and is a substitute for a considered one. I reject your implication and have not made excuses for the sandpaper trio on any grounds let alone parochialism. Waugh said he thought he caught it and it his right to appeal. No one has any evidence to contradict his belief wasn’t genuine. Therefore the insistence that it wasn’t is parochial.

I was not arguing I was making a simple statement on the 'cheating' aspect of this thread that I believe to be true, not directed at you in any way.

 

[the big bambino]

I never talked about Waugh, only Waugh will ever know for sure. I said why Mathews probably did what he did so comparing the two is pointless. Waugh may have very well ask for the referral in this day an age, under similar circumstances.

I was not arguing I was making a simple statement on the 'cheating' aspect of this thread that I believe to be true, not directed at you in any way.

1st para. But the comparison is central to the accusation made against Waugh. Matthews had exactly the same opportunity to acknowledge a clearly bumped ball irrespective of the technology available. So why believe him and not Waugh?

2nd para. Ok and thanks for clarifying that.

 

[vcs]

Dhoni claiming Peterson at Lord’s remains the most blatant bounced ball claimed as a catch in cricket history.

See also, Strauss (very sad about his wife btw) claiming Hughes on the 09 Ashes tour. That was up there with Harper claiming a c&b off Bevan in that memorable New Years one dayer at the scg.

Come on FFS.

The Waugh ones were ridiculously blatant. This one is a half-volley and it's plausible that he might not have known it if he'd taken his eyes off the ball at the last instant.

 

[OverratedSanity]

Come on FFS.

The Waugh ones were ridiculously blatant. This one is a half-volley and it's plausible that he might not have known it if he'd taken his eyes off the ball at the last instant.

Nah mate apparently it's just as bad as picking it up off the ground. Clearly the same.

Although Tbf, we shouldn't fall into the trap the aussies want by deflecting it by pointing out minor indiscretions by other countries. It's a diversionary tactic.

 

[OverratedSanity]

If you actually want to point out a cheating incident by an Indian it'd probably be Ganguly claiming a "catch" in the wc final. Obviously less blatant and less cheat-y than Waugh but then again everyone is.

 

[StephenZA]

Amusing to me that generally if a claim (or referral is asked for) on a bumped ball the assumption is the fielder 'knew' and was taking a chance and cheating.... I'm not sure why that is but it is a happy affection in cricket.

 

[Spark]

Tangential but I think the 2011 WC was the worst for "clean catches not being given because of replays"

 

[Spark]

Amusing to me that generally if a claim (or referral is asked for) on a bumped ball the assumption is the fielder 'knew' and was taking a chance and cheating.... I'm not sure why that is but it is a happy affection in cricket.

I don't understand it at all

 

[Kilowatt]

Yes

 

[Burgey]

Nah mate apparently it's just as bad as picking it up off the ground. Clearly the same.

Although Tbf, we shouldn't fall into the trap the aussies want by deflecting it by pointing out minor indiscretions by other countries. It's a diversionary tactic.

Lol minor indiscretion. It hit his ****ing wrist on the way back up with an entire slip cordon standing there watching it from no more than four metres away and they all went up as well. It’s as blatant as it gets.

 

[trundler]

Still unrelated to Waugh dropping a catch, watching it fall, picking it up off the ground and claiming it though.

 

[Victor Ian]

Lol minor indiscretion. It hit his ****ing wrist on the way back up with an entire slip cordon standing there watching it from no more than four metres away and they all went up as well. It’s as blatant as it gets.

So the whole slips cordon are cheats. At least with Waugh, both times, the ball is out of view. Shameless!

 

[cnerd123]

Lol at the Aussies trying to call others cheats instead of simply admitting Waugh cheated.

Overly sensitive fans, a ****** team and banning your best players...I don't even recognise Australian cricket anymore tbh. Your best bowler is a finger spinner too FFS.