Ponting won't let it rest.

[twctopcat]

I thought it was at the umpires discression whether the fielder could go off or not, not a case of injury??

 

[magsi23]

I think ponting should be banned for couple of test matches, he is not setting a good example, why he became concerned all of a sudden when he got run out? why didnt he mention it openly before?although they've said its been a problem from the start of the series, but i think it became a problem only when he got out? what a joker, its like playing for school all over again and not a captain of australian national side.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

I thought it was at the umpires discression whether the fielder could go off or not, not a case of injury??

Yes, but the umpire has to be satisfied by the reason, and the laws state that things going off for things like a change of clothes or a rest is fine, but you won't be replaced by a sub. You only get a sub if your fielder is incapable of fielding.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

I think ponting should be banned for couple of test matches, he is not setting a good example, why he became concerned all of a sudden when he got run out? why didnt he mention it openly before?although they've said its been a problem from the start of the series, but i think it became a problem only when he got out? what a joker, its like playing for school all over again and not a captain of australian national side.

Err, he discussed it three times earlier in the series with the match referees, and it has been mentioned in interviews and so on going back to the start of the one day series. How did it only become an issue when he was run out?

 

[Mermaidman]

i am 20 and i remember past ashes series and (i am not saying that these decisions werent bad) when Australia were dominating england in the 90's England had plenty of these decisions go there way. I dont remember england throwing the toys out of the pram, oh by the way the Aussie fast bowlers go off too its only because jones was injured that they had to use two subs its in the laws of the game its legal .(ps i loved when Ponting kicked off at the England dressing room and they sent out Trevor Penney the best fielder in England for years Australia played these sort of mind games for years and it was hillarious)

 

[marc71178]

Why do people keep saying there's no law against it. There is... you can only have a sub if a fielder is injured, simple as that. Obviously with Jones that's fine, but every other time England has done it, it hasn't been.

(b) The umpires shall have discretion, for other wholly acceptable reasons, to allow a substitute for a fielder, or a runner for a batsman, at the start of the match or at any subsequent time.

So therefore that's dissent then...

 

[marc71178]

Pretty pathetic conduct by a team coach, it must be said. Ponting should have kept his emotions in check, but Fletcher certainly seems to be doing all he can to provoke him, given that he promptly sent a second sub fielder out on to the field after Ponting was dismissed.

Funny how when the boot's on the other foot there's a major outcry isn't it?

 

[marc71178]

this whole situation has been blown out of proportion i'm dalm sure if Australia were winning Ponting wouldn't care less

I think that will be the nail being hit on the head.

The reaction to this series is rather reminiscent of a certain Rugby game in November 2003...

 

[Top_Cat]

I don't really understand the need for a rule like that anymore. It's pretty easy to monitor who comes and goes from the field so why not let a captain give his fast-bowlers a breather and be refreshed? If everyone can do it, I'm not seeing the problem. Vaughan's being hunted like he's the devil incarnate but in reality he's breaking a rule which serves no purpose that immediately springs to mind.

 

[deeps]

I don't really understand the need for a rule like that anymore. It's pretty easy to monitor who comes and goes from the field so why not let a captain give his fast-bowlers a breather and be refreshed? If everyone can do it, I'm not seeing the problem. Vaughan's being hunted like he's the devil incarnate but in reality he's breaking a rule which serves no purpose that immediately springs to mind.

Because if you need a break after every spell, you shouldn't be playing test cricket. It's 11 men per side. 11vs11, not 11 vs 15

If a bowler is injured, needs a toilet break, or even needs to get restrapped, thats fine. If he's just going in there to take a break and put his legs up ,that's ridicilious. If it was allowed, it's a significant advantage to the home side.

For example, australia could call on Gillespie, Mcgrath, Hodge, Macgill and Haddin as sub fielders.

England on the other hand, can get the finest county fielders out there. So all of a sudden, we see the poor england fielders haveing a 'break' and county super fielders running around taking amazing catches etc.

you can see how it's not in the spirit of the game at all.

The team of 11 is selected, you stick to that 11 regardless of anything except injury or toilet break.

 

[Top_Cat]

England on the other hand, can get the finest county fielders out there. So all of a sudden, we see the poor england fielders haveing a 'break' and county super fielders running around taking amazing catches etc.

Yes but only one at a time.

Anyway, you missed my point; I wasn't referring to giving any old player a go. My terms of reference assume that only the 12th man can sub (so we get rid of the practice of allowing non-12th men from fielding, assuming there's not multiple injuries or an injury to the 12th man). This eliminates the home team advantage you're talking about. So assuming that, and bearing in mind the 12th man gets paid the same, why not allow it?

 

[deeps]

Then England could still draft in the best County fielder. He would be the 12th man.. a specialist fielder

Australia did not bring a specialist fielder in the squad, and nobody would bring in a specialist fielder.

The rule is fine the way it is now, it just needs to be policed properly

 

[vic_orthdox]

Pick the fast bowler, eh Corey?

You can go two ways about it - crack down on it and make sure that serious injury is virtually the only time you can go off, or loosen the regulations, like Top_Cat says, thus ensuring that there is no grey area.

 

[Top_Cat]

Then England could still draft in the best County fielder. He would be the 12th man.. a specialist fielder

Australia did not bring a specialist fielder in the squad, and nobody would bring in a specialist fielder.

Firstly, I'm still not convinced that drafting in one decent fielder will make a huge difference. Yes Ponting was run-out by Pratt but that was a poor choice of a run and is the only example so far in the series where a decent sub fielder has actually made a significant contribution to the game.

Also, if you select one guy as a specialist fielder, you deny the opportunity of a player you actually want in the side to be 12th man and feel part of the squad. As such, I don't think bringing in a specialist fielder would actually be wide-spread. The disadvantages are only slightly outweighed by the advantages.

So again, why does enforcing the rule actually matter and if both sides can sub their 12th man at will and give the bowlers a break, why not allow it?

 

[Top_Cat]

Pick the fast bowler, eh Corey?

Not my fault you're too lazy to bowl fast so resort to dibbly dobblers.

You can go two ways about it - crack down on it and make sure that serious injury is virtually the only time you can go off, or loosen the regulations, like Top_Cat says, thus ensuring that there is no grey area.

I'm only questioning why there is such a stigma attached to it if both sides can do it (sub using the 12th man ONLY I mean).

 

[vic_orthdox]

Not my fault you're too lazy to bowl fast so resort to dibbly dobblers

Dibbly dobblers = little meds, not spinners...surely! Get your definitions right

And not all of us have the make up to bowl fast - except at the tailenders batting in the 4ths net when it's nearly pitch black at the end of training.

 

[Top_Cat]

Dibbly dobblers = little meds, not spinners...surely! Get your definitions right

In my eyes, you're all just slow. Make all the petty distinctions you wish, you'll barely rate a reading on my care-factor-o-meter.

 

[Paid The Umpire]

Sounds like something is brewing here... Top_Cat vs Vic. Battle to the death using high amount of jello.

 

[sqwerty]

First - a disclaimer. I don't want anything to be done, even if it's true. There's too much rot and whining going on for my liking already.

However...

You really don't see the connection between being fined 75% of his match fee for what amounted to dissent, making an apology and then continuing the same line of complaining in the media (if that indeed is what has happened), do you? It's the match officials who have the final say as to whether a substitute is allowed, therefore in creating a fuss he's questioning the decision of the match officials - and people at sunny ICC Towers will more than likely take a passing interest - rightly or wrongly.

He was apologising for the abuse he levelled at the English dressing room. He wasn't apologising for his point of view.

 

[sqwerty]

Pretty pathetic conduct by a team coach, it must be said. Ponting should have kept his emotions in check, but Fletcher certainly seems to be doing all he can to provoke him, given that he promptly sent a second sub fielder out on to the field after Ponting was dismissed.

Yep agree exactly. He's an pretty ordinary human being anyway Fletcher. No different to a send off really and I'm sure all the poms think that's fine too.