Gilchrist re-opens Walking Debate...

Entertainment Cricket and Other Sports
1

Just wathing the replay and reading newspapers, i believe **Gilchrist didnt hear what Umpire said **. As i read on KK that he went out even after umpire gave him not out.. Though its still a great gesure to walk.

**I won’t encourage walking: Ponting](http://www.jang-group.com/thenews/mar2003-daily/19-03-2003/sports/s15.htm)

Victorious Australia captain Ricky Ponting said he had no plans to encourage his players to walk after Adam Gilchrist gave himself out in the World Cup semi-final against Sri Lanka on Tuesday.

Gilchrist headed back to the pavilion without waiting for the umpire’s decision after getting an edge to a sweep shot and seeing the ball loop to wicketkeeper Kumar Sangakkara.

“He knew he had got a bat on it and didn’t bother looking at the umpire,” Ponting told a news conference after Australia’s 48-win in the rain-affected match. "He just turned and walked off. I think all of us were surprised in the dressing room. I won’t be encouraging any of our batsmen to do it. No, it’s up to them.

“I won’t tell any of our batsmen what to do. To walk or not to walk, it’s how they see it on the day.”

Umpire Rudi Koertzen had appeared to mouth ‘not out’ after the incident, which left Australia on 34 for one. Ponting, however, said Gilchrist had not been aware of the umpire’s decision. “Talking to Gilly after that, he just didn’t see Rudi Koertzen say not out.”

**

2

**Gilchrist re-opens walking debate

South Africa: It seemed like a regulation dismissal. Adam Gilchrist bottom-edged an attempted sweep shot onto his pad, the ball ballooned into the air and was caught by wicketkeeper Kumar Sangakkara.

Regulation it may have been but it was unusual too because, when Rudi Koertzen appeared to mouth “not out”, Gilchrist himself overruled the umpire and headed towards the pavilion.

The trend of walking is now as rare as hen’s teeth among professional cricketers as the game has become more hard-bitten and cynical over the past 30 years.

Gilchrist’s act, and a similar gesture from Sri Lanka’s Aravinda de Silva in the World Cup against Zimbabwe on Saturday, might indicate that some players at least are starting to rediscover a conscience.

The fact that Gilchrist was in the pressure-cooker atmosphere of a semifinal between Australia and Sri Lanka made his gesture even more remarkable.

Cricket was for many years a largely amateur game and was seen as the epitome of good sporting behaviour, with phrases such as “it’s just not cricket” entering the English language to indicate something that was patently unfair.

However, an increasing move towards professionalism from the 1970s saw the gradual erosion of such ideals.

Ironically, given Tuesday’s incident, it was Australia, under Ian Chappell in the mid-1970s, who were widely credited with starting the trend of not walking, even when the batsman knew he was out. Chappell’s attitude was that it was the umpire’s job to make the decision. As a result, he would stand his ground until the finger was raised, no matter how obvious the dismissal.

Chappell’s approach even drove West Indies fast bowler Michael Holding to tears when he was given not out after apparently edging a catch to wicketkeeper Deryck Murray.

Former England captain Tony Greig was another player with a similar attitude and, although there were exceptions in the years that followed, the act of a player standing his ground gradually permeated through most professionals.

While other sports, such as golf and snooker, commonly see competitors call fouls against themselves, cricket has slipped down that fair-play scale.

Maybe Gilchrist’s gesture was an admission by a player that cricket needs to get its house in order.

The game’s reputation has suffered terribly in recent years with a betting scandal engulfing the game in 2000 while the current World Cup has been affected by political wrangles over Zimbabwe and Kenya that have detracted from the action on the field. It may have been one small act but, coming from a well-respected player in the game’s highest profile tournament, it was as welcome as it was refreshing.

**

3

Firstly, it was shocking to see an aussie bat walking off on his own. Over the years, it's become like a (unwritten) definite no-no if ya don the baggy green not to.

To highlight the issue, he overturned the umpire's decision. Silliness aside, you can't just disregard decisions on your own. The umpires are having a hard time with credibility issues as it is, what with them having to unfairly compete with machines for accurate calls.

I'd say good sportsmanship on Gilly's part, but overall I agree with Ponting completely. There's no need to walk if the ump doesn't think you nicked it, and if he says no, then the more so for staying your ground. Rebuffing official decisions is terrible for cricketing PR.

As long as it's legal, there's no harm in living by the rules hard.

4

I think its just bull, Gilly saw the umpire shake his head but still walked away, good sportsmanship from him but these Aussies have the reputation of bad boys which I think they seem to enjoy, so denying the fact of his good sportsmanship, Gilly doesn't want to be the laughing stock in the Aussie locker room.

5

I am not so sure about a batsman walking. After all, batsmen are a target of umpire's bad decisions when they are mistakingly given OUT. It all balances out if you let the umpire make the decision everytime. When I am batting, I always look for the umpire's finger after an appeal.

6

Funguy - When Umpires make the bad decisions then it's not always the batsman who suffers, Its the bowlers too, so that kinda evens it out, sometimes the batsmen get the decision in their favor, and sometimes the bowlers.

Anyways - This Gilchrist guy is making the most out of it. :) :-

Adam Gilchrist says the frustration at watching the Englishmen stand their ground during the recent Ashes series got him thinking about 'walking' in a match.

The Australia vice-captain, who shocked his team mates -- and the world -- on Tuesday by deciding to walk back to the pavilion even though the umpire ruled him 'not out' to a catch in the World Cup semi-final against Sri Lanka, revealed that his conscience was stirred by England captain Nasser Hussain's refusal 'walk' after Jason Gillespie had caught him in the Boxing Day Test. He also recalled another no-walk incident in the Adelaide Test involving Michael Vaughan.

"I'd smashed it and I thought I should walk off," Gilchrist told AAP about Tuesday's incident.

He said: "Hussain and Vaughan had me thinking a lot about walking or times when players have blatantly nicked the ball, know they have and whether they should walk.

"I'm not on a crusade to try and get it back to the old days of gentlemen's behaviour but a lot of the time I was thinking, 'I wonder if I'll ever be in a scenario where I'm the batsman and I have to make that decision'.

"Today that situation came up and something inside me said 'walk' so I went. I saw (umpire) Rudi (Koertzen) give me not out and shake his head, so I just went.

"I remember vividly the Boxing Day Test when Nasser Hussain didn't go when Dizzy (Gillespie) claimed to have caught him.

"I remember thinking and saying to a few people that there was the perfect opportunity for a player to make a statement.

"Maybe, because it's been in my mind I reacted that way. I don't want to have headlines around the world saying I'm making a stand that players should walk but that's my feelings on the scenario and how I can play the game, hopefully."

7

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Asif_k: *

"Today that situation came up and something inside me said 'walk' so I went. I saw (umpire) Rudi (Koertzen) give me not out and shake his head, so I just went.

[/QUOTE]

and Now he s bull****ing. Even his captain said yesterday that he didnt know umpire gave that NOT OUT. He already made a big and courageous gesture by walking i agree, but now he is going in wrong directions. He forgot Steve Waugh , his ver own didnt walk after nikcing the ball in 4th Ashes test??? Well he sure will remember other teams doing that :)