Confirmed: Rabada banned for two matches

[OverratedSanity]

You joke, but honestly, it really is difficult to judge who really bumped into whom there.

 

[cnerd123]

All jokes have a kernel of truth in them.

If such a shoulder barge is a grave enough offence to earn 3 demerit points, then it should be beyond doubt that Rabada caused it. There is no sign of Smith even trying to avoid it. He seems as aware of it happening as Rabada does. Why does the blame fall on the bowler and not the batsman? You can't send off a batsman after dismissing him but he can walk right into you? Is that it? Or is it only because Smith complained about it right after?

 

[harsh.ag]

First of all, let's stop calling it a barge.

 

[Son Of Coco]

Snowflake? Bed wetter? Whingeing Pom?? Just like the cricketers with their self governed "line" mate you are the stereotypical Aussie sports fan that likes to dish it out but cries foul when a bit comes back your way.

Just look at your posts to ***** and to me, and if you really should see that you're just being a softcock. Fmd all I said to you was "waaaahhh".

Hmmmm...very interesting indeed.

 

[cnerd123]

First of all, let's stop calling it a barge.

I'll stop when they stop calling a cricket ball a 'nut'

#CheatingAussies

 

[Burgey]

How bad is rolling a nut? Seriously one of the worst things you can do.

 

[Daemon]

How bad is rolling a nut? Seriously one of the worst things you can do.

Women moan about mild things like childbirth and period cramps but this here is just the worst.

 

[quincywagstaff]

All jokes have a kernel of truth in them.

If such a shoulder barge is a grave enough offence to earn 3 demerit points, then it should be beyond doubt that Rabada caused it. There is no sign of Smith even trying to avoid it. He seems as aware of it happening as Rabada does. Why does the blame fall on the bowler and not the batsman? You can't send off a batsman after dismissing him but he can walk right into you? Is that it? Or is it only because Smith complained about it right after?

This came up earlier in the thread, but there's no evidence that I've seen that Smith complained to the umpire on anyone else on the ground; he headed towards Shaun Marsh to debate whether to send the dismissal for DRS.

As to who was at fault for the collison, it seemed that Smith was walking straight down the pitch while Rabada was heading towards gully on a different angle; I recall seeing one picture of the dismissal that showed this clearly. If they felt Smith was equally to blame or mainly to blame, they could've easily charged him.

And while it's true that the collision was very minor, what had happened if he'd done that to someone like Ben Stokes who is well known for biting back and a confrontation had started? Could've easily gone totally under control in those circumstances.

 

[quincywagstaff]

I'm not sure about the rest of humanity but I find it exceedingly easy to not brush by people, even in busy streets. And I find the normal reaction for anyone having experienced contact is to turn and look at the culprit. Some of you are really trying to find conspiracy in Smith's actions where there is none.

It's bizarre how there was an argument that Rabada's action was totally accidental. Throughout this match we saw a superbly tuned athlete who was able to bowl express fast bowling to the highest class. And yet we're supposed to believe that he's also a bumbling Clouseau-like character who somehow can't bump into people?

 

[cnerd123]

Punishing Rabada because in a hypothetical scenario Ben Stokes cannot control his anger seems very backwards

 

[Spark]

It's bizarre how there was an argument that Rabada's action was totally accidental. Throughout this match we saw a superbly tuned athlete who was able to bowl express fast bowling to the highest class. And yet we're supposed to believe that he's also a bumbling Clouseau-like character who somehow can't bump into people?

What do the two things have to do with each other?

 

[OverratedSanity]

It's bizarre how there was an argument that Rabada's action was totally accidental. Throughout this match we saw a superbly tuned athlete who was able to bowl express fast bowling to the highest class. And yet we're supposed to believe that he's also a bumbling Clouseau-like character who somehow can't bump into people?

This is strange. You're saying just because he's an athletic fast bowler, he can't accidentally brush someone's shoulder?

 

[harsh.ag]

It's bizarre how there was an argument that Rabada's action was totally accidental. Throughout this match we saw a superbly tuned athlete who was able to bowl express fast bowling to the highest class. And yet we're supposed to believe that he's also a bumbling Clouseau-like character who somehow can't bump into people?

Personally I think it's bizarre it was decided with great certainty that it was deliberate.

 

[Adders]

i've brushed into 20 people today and it's only 1030 AM

you Australians really dont understand how the rest of the world lives don't you

Yeah but you're a dirty perv so that's more than likely deliberate..........unlike KG who's brush must surely have been an accident. I mean who the **** would want to touch SPD if they had a choice??

 

[Marius]

If you watch the footage you can clearly see that Rabada pulls his shoulder back will Steve Smith holds his line.

 

[StephenZA]

This came up earlier in the thread, but there's no evidence that I've seen that Smith complained to the umpire on anyone else on the ground; he headed towards Shaun Marsh to debate whether to send the dismissal for DRS.

As to who was at fault for the collison, it seemed that Smith was walking straight down the pitch while Rabada was heading towards gully on a different angle; I recall seeing one picture of the dismissal that showed this clearly. If they felt Smith was equally to blame or mainly to blame, they could've easily charged him.

And while it's true that the collision was very minor, what had happened if he'd done that to someone like Ben Stokes who is well known for biting back and a confrontation had started? Could've easily gone totally under control in those circumstances.

Smith clearly complained... immediately after the brush Smith shoots his head around as if he heard a gun shot behind him and then as he his walking towards his partner is looking at the umpire roles his shoulder and you can clearly see him use the word barge. As for direction, Rabada was heading towards gully and his mates, and Smith was walking off, slows down and then changes direction towards the middle of the pitch as he decides to review or not.

What you are talking about is extrapolating for the nth degree.... if we do that then the Lyon decisions makes no sense, because dropping a ball down near somebody`s head could also get somebody like ben stokes going, and what if the ball had to actually hit the player then what. Either you take the circumstance as is or you extrapolate for every incident. Throwing the ball near a opposition player is a level 2 offense, due to circumstance they decided it was only level 1... I`m fine with that. But they charged Rabada with level 2 offence because of what happened prior in the series and how Smith reacted even though it was a slight brush past, with no clear intent.

 

[mr_mister]

Rabadas a brat and this punishment is as good as a public spanking

 

[Marius]

Rabadas a brat and this punishment is as good as a public spanking

And Warner and Smith aren't?

 

[Top_Cat]

I personally don't think we can categorically reject that the Aussies decided pre-series to needle Rabada due to his status re: demerit points. Risky because, yknow, he's one of the best bowlers currently walking the planet and can (and did) wreck ya.

 

[mr_mister]

And Warner and Smith aren't?

Warner yes Smith no