they were showing various great bowlers from old times and i nearly watched 50-60 wickets in 1 1/2 – 2 hours. And one thing that i noticed was nearly all the batsmen didnt even bother to look at the umpire when caught behind or a clear LBW. They just walked away no mater how faint the edge was, in few cases without even an appeal.
Whoever has played cricket knows that as a batsman u know it when u nick it, even if there is no sound & its very thin u feel it.
Anyway, why dont we see the similar sportsman spiritship often anymore in the cricket? batsman these days r soooo dheet and good actors to pretent they didnt nick :o
Satisfying thread, this. I am sure we will generate profitable discussions in due time.
One of the diminutive aspects that the sportsman spirit is seen very little these days (one can count all the batters with such possession in one hand) is because of the commercialization of cricket coupled with vast amount of money flowing in. When there is a briefcase full of paper involved in anything, expectations tend to run high and mighty, and with these, comes the factor labeled gentleman, a part of this game. Most batsmen tend to hang onto their (prized) wicket as to, well, avoid the backlash in the dressing room, arguably reduce the unhealthy criticism in the media, and last but no least, help themselves in buying a secure position within their squad, for however long possible.
Cricket of then and cricket is now, difference is the amount of money being spent in globalization of the game with less alienism. The more it have become popular, expectations have run even that big, which forces the batsmen to occupy their crease. True that if and when you kiss the ball, you catch it instantly, but there are times when nobody in the vicinity know as to what has taken place, which is where the umpire comes into the picture.
World Cup saw too many decisions being wrongly given, one way or the other. We have witnessed plumb leg before's, in situations where the umpire felt that moving his finger was against the law of gravity. Aleem Dar is one umpire that sticks to mind. Even though every other umpire involved has given extreme decisions, I can't help but feel that even Aleem Dar saw himself on the edge of monumental blunders. There was a talk going on a few months ago that a batting side would be able to appeal to the umpire's decision by taking it upstairs. It should be given a serious thought. Umpires cannot be scraped out of the context of the game but let the third umpire also come into the picture here, yes? With the help of TV replays and nick-o-meters and whatnot, we can get better viewing experience by knowing that a decision which have been appealed by the batting side and now being given, is correct on all counts. Granted that umpires are a must, but let's not have them play the role of a god. Why not use the technology at your fingertips to a better advantage?
yea I saw that Dhoni dismissal he was plumb and he didnt even look at the ump! good sportman spirit, then I saw that piece of SHT Jaques Kallis, clearly nicked one to the keeper against SL today but stood there as if nothing happened!
Equating sportsmanship with a player's willingness to walk on being out(but not given) is plain WRONG....because more often players are given OUT, when they are clearly NOT. So, if Cricket was my livelihood, I too would exploit any luck that came my way.
I think, on an average, there is at least one wrong LBW decision per match ( an LBW that was not given OR an LBW that should not have been given). And course there are always other Umpiring errors.
Equating sportsmanship with a player's willingness to walk on being out(but not given) is plain WRONG....because more often players are given OUT, when they are clearly NOT. So, if Cricket was my livelihood, I too would exploit any luck that came my way.
I think, on an average, there is at least one wrong LBW decision per match ( an LBW that was not given OR an LBW that should not have been given). And course there are always other Umpiring errors.
How would you define 'sportsmanship' in the game of cricket?
Do you suggest any means to help reduce the human error to a lesser margin with the advent of technology?
I dont want to repeat the excellent summary to JBr's initial post
It has been very well said in the posts above
In the older days (and by that I mean around 15 / 20 years or so) cricket was played as a sport, players wore sparkling white pants and shirts, that gentlemanly gesture of handing over the sweater politely to the umpire before starting the over, and then taking it back at the end of the over with a THANK YOU.. all seems to be lost somewhere in the razzle dazzle of the soft drink logos, sport equipment company slogans and blah blah blah.
Now they look like monkeys, wearing yellow blue brown purple trousers and shirts... MONEY MONEY MONEY seems to be the only driving force and source of inspiration for the players... no one give a ess aich wye tee about the SPIRIT of the game... as long as his own pocket gets its fair share at the end of the day..
How many times have you seen a bowling team calling back the batsman after the batsman was clearly NOT OUT but given out by the Umpire. On the contrary, bowlers often pressurize the Umpire (through needless appealing) to give the batsman OUT.... How come nobody brings the question of "sportsmanship" then ? Why does the mantle of sportsmanship have to always lie at the doorstep of the batsman.
Cricket is hardly perfect. There are so many wrong decisions, unfortunate run-outs etc....In these circumstances, if Cricket was my livelihood, I would use any luck that came my way...and that's what many batsman who don't "walk" do.
As for your second question :
I have opened threads about this subject before. But I will repeat :
Consider the number of times decisions are referred to the third Umpire these days. Now think about the time when International Cricket was played wihout any third Umpire. Imazine how many wrong decisions would have been made. So many run-outs wrongly given/not given (when the Umpire was really not so sure - as is evident today)
The same thing with LBWs. If tomorrow, ICC comes out with a rule which says that field Umpires can refer LBW decisions to the third Umpire....you will see Umpires calling for the third Umpire almost everytime the ball hits the pads any where close to the line of stumps...which will clearly prove that Umpires have been giving LBW decisions today without being 100% sure most of the times...
I am all for allowing hawk-eye technology to be used by Third Umpires for making LBW decisions. The technology may not be perfect but it is certainly better than the judgement made by naked eyes. Now, if this reduces the role of field Umpires to counting balls...so be it.
Yes, I second your thoughts. This gentleman’ly’ factor comes into question for the batting side as well as the fielding side. And to add one more element in this equation of ours, the spectators also furnish as a major part of this puzzle. Riots break out in stands and human lives are taken past the danger line and for what? Behind the curtains is the role of media which can take the fairytale ending and twist it into a nightmare.
The sportsmanship spirit is still seen these days, but unlikely to catch any attention. Even if it is there, it hardly gets any attention from the commentators. An added sentence or two, and we get back to normal programming.
Top post by James_Bhaand. Nice reading.
I stumbled across this very well-written article by Sangakkara. A sentence below caught my eye -
Being a good sport is about as outdated in the modern world as throwing your scarf or sheet for a lady to walk over a puddle.
The reason is that being honest is not enough a part of the game as much winning the game is.
