Is "Not Walking" cheating just like "Grounding the ball and claiming" ?

Entertainment Cricket and Other Sports
1

Current Aus vs Ind test has highlighted the issue.

I am wondering why people take “grounding the ball while catching and claiming” as cheating but dont take “Not walking after clear edge” as cheating? What is the difference b/w two? what do you think? which camp do you belong too and why?

Personally I think not walking should also fall in same level as grounding and claiming.

2

Re: Is "Not Walking" cheating just like "Grounding the ball and claiming" ?

I too feel the same way. Both offences are similar, and it's grossly unfair to punish one and let the other go scot-free. Either you punish both or let both be decided by the umpire.

3

Re: Is "Not Walking" cheating just like "Grounding the ball and claiming" ?

We have to understand here that the umpires are the ones that will give someone out. Having said that, the general practice is that the umpire will ask and assume that when a catch is claimed, its legitimate. From a batsman's point of view, I admire people that walk, but I will not call people that dont walk as cheats. Do batsmen get an option to stay back when they are given out when they didnt nick it? or edged it onto the pads and still got given out?? Batsman doesnt have a choice, if hes given out, he has to walk no matter what... so they have a right to not walk if they are given not out... I do believe in that 'balances out in the long run theory' because they get given out when they arent as well... if they started walking,,, thats just doubling your badluck by having no goodluck, and having the badluck to still get some bad decisions and walking.

I do consider claiming the catch as cheating if you 'KNOW' that u grassed it... in the international matches, they could probably go to the 3rd umpire if unsure.

Dedicated to Sannan
4

Re: Is "Not Walking" cheating just like "Grounding the ball and claiming" ?

Hey Kaka-Atom-Bum Can I plz ask u what ur username means? Esp the Kaka bit pweezzz I wana no lol.

5

Re: Is "Not Walking" cheating just like "Grounding the ball and claiming" ?

i remember once Rashid Latif being banned for two tests as he claimed a catch which had touch the ground. what a double standard

6

Re: Is “Not Walking” cheating just like “Grounding the ball and claiming” ?

Umpire should ask leg umpire and not the fielder/team who is claiming the catch in first place.

Rashid Latif was banned for a similar offence as mentioned by akhan4 but Ponting, Clarke are not even warned :k: … Aussies are Gods.

7

Re: Is "Not Walking" cheating just like "Grounding the ball and claiming" ?

oh and for the topic :D .... Batsman who doesn't walk when the nick gets caught is not a cheat IMO, its umpire's job to find out and give the verdict... thats what they are paid for.

8

Re: Is “Not Walking” cheating just like “Grounding the ball and claiming” ?

9

Re: Is "Not Walking" cheating just like "Grounding the ball and claiming" ?

The 'benefit of doubt' in cricket always meant that batsman will be given chance, since bowler will have many chances to bowl him out again, but if he is given out by misjudgement, that can have bigger impact on the team. Thats the kind of mentality that created such rules and umpires taking time to give a verdict. But it could reverse the situation. I think batsman is always in hope of getting away with it, which is wrong. But according to the books they won't be blamed. Now they should be after all this saga.

I think Umpires should be sharp enough (or consult with TV Umpire more often) so regardless of a batsman standing or strong appeals by keeper/bowler, justice is done.