Red Cards in Cricket?

[open365]

u suk

there's irony there somewhere but i just can't seem to find it...

 

[Neil Pickup]

Could you read these before you start mouthing off please?

The other option, of course, is another post like that and then I can ban you.

 

[marc71178]

Yes i saw the incident......and im quite sure bell would av known that he hadnt taken the catch cleanly.........just like Sami, when he took a return catch that was low......halted the celebrations of his team....because he hadnt taken it cleanly.....Bell clearly cheated!

Also, I think Sami might have stopped the appeal because it was obvious to all watching that it had hit the floor.

 

[deeps]

It was obvious Bell was unsure. Having played alot of cricket myself, there has been one or two occasions where i've dived forwards, and caught it, and not been 100% sure. Never during a match situation, but during training.

I'm sure bell knew there was a chance of not having caught it, and his expression showed that he was unsure. So then he should have told the umpire he wasn't sure, not tried to claim it as a catch.

Rashid Latif got done for it, why didn't bell? Oh that's right, Bell plays for England

 

[no1_gangsta_786]

It was obvious Bell was unsure. Having played alot of cricket myself, there has been one or two occasions where i've dived forwards, and caught it, and not been 100% sure. Never during a match situation, but during training.

I'm sure bell knew there was a chance of not having caught it, and his expression showed that he was unsure. So then he should have told the umpire he wasn't sure, not tried to claim it as a catch.

Rashid Latif got done for it, why didn't bell? Oh that's right, Bell plays for England

Well Said!!

 

[open365]

It was obvious Bell was unsure. Having played alot of cricket myself, there has been one or two occasions where i've dived forwards, and caught it, and not been 100% sure. Never during a match situation, but during training.

I'm sure bell knew there was a chance of not having caught it, and his expression showed that he was unsure. So then he should have told the umpire he wasn't sure, not tried to claim it as a catch.

Rashid Latif got done for it, why didn't bell? Oh that's right, Bell plays for England

Bell wasn't sure he caught it,which is why he didn't appeal so forcefully,IMO,he would have preferred it if the umpires had taken the sensible option and asked the 3rd umpire but they didn't so whats he meant to do?

he can't tell them to ask the 3rd umpire.You can tell he regretted throwing the ball up in the air because he of what he did afterwards.

 

[Scaly piscine]

It was obvious Bell was unsure. Having played alot of cricket myself, there has been one or two occasions where i've dived forwards, and caught it, and not been 100% sure. Never during a match situation, but during training.

I'm sure bell knew there was a chance of not having caught it, and his expression showed that he was unsure. So then he should have told the umpire he wasn't sure, not tried to claim it as a catch.

Rashid Latif got done for it, why didn't bell? Oh that's right, Bell plays for England

It's been pointed out repeatedly that Bell showed he was unsure, so why do you go on about it? Oh that's right, you're a convict*.





* Haven't a clue if they are actually Australian, but you get the idea of their stupid logic.

 

[deeps]

Bell wasn't sure he caught it,which is why he didn't appeal so forcefully,IMO,he would have preferred it if the umpires had taken the sensible option and asked the 3rd umpire but they didn't so whats he meant to do?

he can't tell them to ask the 3rd umpire.You can tell he regretted throwing the ball up in the air because he of what he did afterwards.

Um, he can tell them to ask the 3rd umpire. Throwing the ball in the air, implies that "yes, i caught that"

He could have went to the umpires and said "i'm not sure" and the umpires would refer to the 3rd umpire, they are allowed to refer catches to the 3rd umpire.

Infact, this has happened MANY times in international cricket. I'm sure Bell was aware of it too.

 

[deeps]

It's been pointed out repeatedly that Bell showed he was unsure, so why do you go on about it? Oh that's right, you're a convict*.

* Haven't a clue if they are actually Australian, but you get the idea of their stupid logic.

Afridi apologized, yet you still go on about it. It's such a pity you have to keep going back to the 'convict' argument from many decades ago. Pity again that your argument doesn't hold up as my parents are both indian.

 

[Scaly piscine]

Afridi apologized, yet you still go on about it. It's such a pity you have to keep going back to the 'convict' argument from many decades ago. Pity again that your argument doesn't hold up as my parents are both indian.

How does apologising suddenly make it OK that he's a cheat? Also my argument *does* hold up because the logic still holds, as I pointed out, but then you're obviously not a big fan of logic and having your own stupid argument turned against you.

 

[deeps]

HAlso my argument *does* hold up because the logic still holds, as I pointed out, but then you're obviously not a big fan of logic and having your own stupid argument turned against you.

How exactly does your comment about me being a convict hold up logically?

I'm not saying apologizing makes it better. You said the following:

It's been pointed out repeatedly that Bell showed he was unsure, so why do you go on about it?

What kinda statement is that? So i figured i'd stick in a stupid statement like yours and see how u reacted.


also, it'd be nice if you explained how my argument was turned against me?

 

[Scaly piscine]

"Rashid Latif got done for it, why didn't bell? Oh that's right, Bell plays for England"

It's been pointed out repeatedly that Bell showed he was unsure, so why do you go on about it? Oh that's right, because you're a convict*.


They're the same stupid argument and the latter was turned against you.

 

[Dasa]

"Rashid Latif got done for it, why didn't bell? Oh that's right, Bell plays for England"

It's been pointed out repeatedly that Bell showed he was unsure, so why do you go on about it? Oh that's right, because you're a convict*.


They're the same stupid argument and the latter was turned against you.

So now petty insults and biased idiocy wins arguments?