|
|
The Tony Greig Show
'Time for cricketers to be honest'
July 21, 2008
In this week's show Tony Greig talks about South Africa's resurgence in the second Test against England, the catching controversies at Headingley, the implementation of the referral system, the challenge before the Indian batsmen on their tour of Sri Lanka and the debate surrounding the EPL
Download (4884k)
|
Listen (13:53)
| Podcast
| iTunes
 Read Comments (9)
|
|
Comments have now been closed for this article
|
|
In response to Rastus, can I be the first to remind you that the referral was not actioned at the request of Vaughan, but by the South African dressing room's decision to send Amla back to the crease. His confidence in taking the catch is a different issue and I do not doubt his integrity, but do not cloud the facts with sentiment. This could all have been avoided if Vaughan had let sleeping dogs lie and not enter the SA dressing room to further castigate Devilliers, we all know how that turned out eh.
Posted by shanos on July 22 2008, 13:25 PM GMT
|
|
Will Test playing Captain's agree that unless the ball has CLEARLY been grassed before the catch has been completed the batsman should be given OUT? This of course is contrary to normal cricket practice where the benefit of the doubt always goes to the batsman.
This would be fair as practically all low catches look dodgy on TV due to various technical reasons as several pundits have argued and demonstrated.
The point about completing the catch is important since both Clarke and Ponting claimed catches which though taken cleanly were put down before the fielder had control.
Posted by Dubby49 on July 22 2008, 08:27 AM GMT
|
|
There is little doubt in the minds of true cricket lovers they would like to see all the players show absolute honesty but unfortunately they are human. Integrity is not something many human beings can pride themselves with so we will just have to use technology to try and see justice done. How wonderful it would be if the De Villiers and Vaughns of this world could take heed of the integrity of players like Gilchrest, SangaKarra and Amla. The English commentators need some serious eye care from a skilled Optician, of course Vaughn cheated otherwise he is just plain stupid.
Posted by Raymil on July 22 2008, 06:36 AM GMT
|
|
Whenever the ball takes the thinnest of the thinnest edges one person who
is supposed to be doubtless is the batsman. Many a times i have seen batsmen pretending nothing happened after the ball took the edge before
reaching the keeper.Umpires are human being too and some times it is very difficult for them to judge if a certain noise or deviation came from the bat or thigh or some other part of the body. We waste little time in accusing the umpires of incompetence but fail to question the integrity of the batsmen. In present day cricket each and every batsman looks at umpire's face, not their own conscience, to know if the ball touched the bat or not. it's a shame for the game.
Vaughan's case is another example how honesty and integrity are becoming
myths of the distant past and dishonesty and cheating is taking it's vacant seat in world cricket.
Masum Dad Khan
Posted by zohebchampion on July 21 2008, 15:09 PM GMT
|
|
'Word of the fielder should be taken'. Tony, you seem to have forgotten the ill fated series between Australia and India 6 months back. The controversy that erupted when Michael Clarke claimed a 'non-catch' and Ponting pointed 'out' to the umpire shows that the international player cannot be trusted, especially when so much is at stake. This is the job of the umpire. Lets stop hiding the umpire's faults behind 'players' conscience'.
There has been no major investment in the development of world class umpires unlike that in case of players. If the quality of umpiring has not deteriorated, it certainly has not increased either.
Posted by raghavmadan on July 21 2008, 12:42 PM GMT
|
|
The Elliott decision was made by Paul Collingwood who has since been kicked out of the test team. Michael Vaughan thought he caught the ball at the time and he still does as do most of the commentators. According to Umpire Bowden Michael Vaughan was so confident he had caught the ball it was Vaughan who suggested going to the third umpire to prove it. In the India incident as in the De Villiers one there was no debate whether the ball bounced or not when it was seen on replays, so there really isn't a similarity.
Posted by Rastus on July 21 2008, 12:17 PM GMT
|
|
I think its time we bring technology into the equasion alot more and im sure the gap between Australia and Bangladesh wont be as wide as its persumed to be.Too many time when teams in the top tier of the rankings come up against lower ranked teams the higher ranked teams always get the luck of the draw especially when it comes to umpire decisions its always something like a 80/20 ratio in favour of the higher ranked team. Lets not only waste time checking to see if a player has stoped a ball from going over the boundary cleanly...but lets save the careers of players which have been cut short by bad umpire misjudgements. My favourite pieces of technology: snicko & hot spot with hawk-eye a distant 3rd
Posted by nataki-daka on July 21 2008, 11:58 AM GMT
|
|
At the present time, the only cricketer who walks consistently is Sangakkara. That is honesty. Walking when circumstances are appropriate, is not.There are times when catches are difficult to be certain of. It now appears that De Villiers was not certain and said so. Vaughan did not. The English media is very good at pontificating to the rest of the world, while never seeing the mote in their own eyes. Cricketers should express doubt when there is one and refer to the umpires. Collingwood in the Elliott incident, and Vaughan in the Amla incident, both descended to levels not expected of a captain of England. Botham and Gower both tried to justify Vaughan's actions in their commentaries. These are both past captains of England. Is there a thread there? Amla walked on the basis of Vaughan's word. To my mind Vaughan made a deliberate attempt to cheat. He could not have been sure he had made a clean catch. How the mighty have fallen!
Posted by Ellis on July 21 2008, 09:21 AM GMT
|
|
I am stumped with all the coverage about Amla being sent back by his teammates after seeing the TV replay. In a test match last year between India and England, KP was three quarters of his way back to the pavilion after a dodgy catch by India 'keeper MS Dhoni when his teammates saw the TV replays and sent him back. Vaughan was the captain on that occasion too. Graeme Smith has given England a bitter taste of their own medicine. The cricket media in general and the English media in particular never raised any objections to this incident then and the same is true even now. England have already conceded the moral high ground with the Grant Elliott fiasco just a month ago and their claims of abiding by the spirit of the game should be taken with a pinch of salt henceforth. Furthermore, England could have accepted South Africa's offer to use the referral system and all this could have been avoided.
Posted by Katri on July 21 2008, 08:00 AM GMT
|
|
|
| Top ^ |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
