PDA

View Full Version : Batsman; Walker or Non Walker?


jazman
17-07-2006, 11:49 AM
This debate raged during the 2nd day's play of the England v Pakistan 1st Test.

The issue was brought up by Michael Holding who had a particular bee in his bonnet about it. He stated that he would always walk if he knew he was out and that is what batsman should do as it is a gentlemans games.

Bumble continued the discussion to say that he agreed with what he was saying but wasn't that worried if a batsman didn't walk as it is down to the umpire anyway. Then comes Athers. He said that batman were always known as walkers or non-walkers. He was a non-walker and always left it up to the umpire. He didn't think that was cheating as umpires had a job to do.

The debate rumbled on and Bumble told Athers to leave it in his usual manner :D Holding then went on to say that he never appealed when bowling if he knew the batsman wasn't out.

I can't personally see the problem if a batsmen doesn't walk as that is the reason for umpires and to a certain extent the 3rd umpire. I just wondered what the view was on the BBS about this.

Pinkie Brown
17-07-2006, 11:54 AM
I though this was about the great Matt Walker :p

In Kent we would walk as we are traditional and gentlemen, other counties I'm not sure about ;)

jazman
17-07-2006, 11:57 AM
Originally posted by Pinkie Brown
I though this was about the great Matt Walker :p

In Kent we would walk as we are traditional and gentlemen, other counties I'm not sure about ;)

As soon as I posted I thought I would get suitable responses from certain Kent fans :rolleyes:

You didn't have much choice but to walk in the Twenty20 games against us ..... :D

Oisin
17-07-2006, 12:04 PM
Either its a gentlemans game for batsmen, bolwers and fielders or its not. Its crazy to say batsmen should walk but the fielding side can appeal everything

Radders
17-07-2006, 12:05 PM
Tough one really. I saw Nasser Hussain given out LBW so many times (once by Bucknor) when the ball came off the middle of the bat first that I think maybe you shouldn't walk. It evens itself out in the long run and in cricket nowdays there are very few 'Walkers' , Gilchrist is the only one that immediately springs to mind. I don't know of any others in test cricket??

Anyone???



However, in our form of Sunday cricket, we walk. I know 'Gazza 2' who posts on here and his team who we play are the same. We play a competetive game but if you nick it and know you nick it you walk, end of.

Pinkie Brown
17-07-2006, 12:06 PM
Seriously though I think they should walk, it's Cricket, it's tradional and it's English. If you want to cheat go to Portugal!

jazman
17-07-2006, 12:08 PM
I agree with you Radders on amatuer cricket. You have to be honest in that. The made by Oisin is also valid that if a batsman are expected to walk then the fielders shouldn't appeal when it's not out.

jazman
17-07-2006, 12:09 PM
Originally posted by Pinkie Brown
Seriously though I think they should walk, it's Cricket, it's tradional and it's English. If you want to cheat go to Portugal!

What an athlete, a fine figure of a man ...... :o

jazman
17-07-2006, 12:10 PM
Originally posted by Pinkie Brown
Seriously though I think they should walk, it's Cricket, it's tradional and it's English. If you want to cheat go to Portugal!

Football was English but that hasn't stopped the divers and Italians .....

Pinkie Brown
17-07-2006, 12:10 PM
Originally posted by jazman
What an athlete, a fine figure of a man ...... :o

who me or Matt ;)

Pinkie Brown
17-07-2006, 12:11 PM
Originally posted by jazman
Football was English but that hasn't stopped the divers and Italians .....

Exactly don't let another great game go down the toilet by cheats

Lingy Eagle
17-07-2006, 12:19 PM
Blimey Jazman, you really have a thing about The Great Matt Walker....now you are starting a thread about him, are you his stalker????....and are you a closet Kent Fan..... :love:

calne eagle
17-07-2006, 12:28 PM
Originally posted by Pinkie Brown
In Kent we would walk, apart from Matt Walker, who would sort of roll, as he's too fat to walk.

:D

Sluggo
17-07-2006, 12:31 PM
As a batsman you know if you are out caught or bowled but things like stumped or run out or LBW are more difficult to tell. I think in the 'village' game the gentlemanly aspect still persists, and rightly so, and if you know you've knicked it to the wicket-keeper you are honour-bound to walk ... unless of course the wicket-keeper drops it!
Run-outs, stumpings ...etc... the umpire is there for a reason other than counting to six every over and so standing your ground is fair enough. It has to be remembered that the standard of umpiring is similar to that of the cricket and it is beholden on both sides to help the umpire out by being honest in their appeals or walking. But the gentlemanly thing to do is take whatever decision comes with good grace. And I have seen batsman called back during my career in village cricket!

The proffesional game, on the other hand is a whole different matter. Much like football, the referees and umpires are there for a reason and have a job to do, so there is nothing wrong with waiting for the decision to be indicated. But again it should be accepted with good grace, which is something sadly lacking in modern football.

ozeagle
17-07-2006, 12:40 PM
what about fieldsman like that chav pietersen who continue to catch the ball with half of it touching the turf?

jazman
17-07-2006, 12:46 PM
Originally posted by Lingy Eagle
Blimey Jazman, you really have a thing about The Great Matt Walker....now you are starting a thread about him, are you his stalker????....and are you a closet Kent Fan..... :love:

I know that you are new to this posting lark so I'll give you a tip. Read the post first before commenting on just the thread title :rolleyes: ;)

oz_da II
17-07-2006, 12:54 PM
Originally posted by ozeagle
what about fieldsman like that chav pietersen who continue to catch the ball with half of it touching the turf?

It's cheating and a disgrace.
In situations like that you are well aware whether you have caught the ball or not. If you have a doubt you must call the batsman back. Benefit goes to the batsman everytime.

Radders
17-07-2006, 12:59 PM
Originally posted by ozeagle
what about fieldsman like that chav pietersen who continue to catch the ball with half of it touching the turf?

When was this??

Tomo
17-07-2006, 01:06 PM
If their are cameras the batsmen are not always sure. I have always walked as does every one in my team if they know they have nicked it. Sometimes you are never sure so won't. Unfortantly the last 2 weeks we have had teams who have not only not walked but had their own umpires give not outs to blatant nicks, LBWs and yesterday a run out. We have lost the last 2 weeks because of such decisions. 2 weeks ago a big edge which I dived to collect. He didn't walk and umpire gave not out both making up shit, and quite different excuses. He went on to get 60 odd not out and they won. Yesterday 1st ball plum LBW. Not out only for it to happen 3 more times to the bloke who then got 75no and they won. But to make this worse he got tired so asked for a runner who got run out but their umpire didn't give it. Myabe you should consider this batsmen was 65 and his runner was 21 and similar speeds to linford christie.. Wasn't impressed. And don't get me started on their wide calls.

Sorry Rant Over.

And answer to your question is I walk.

glaziers fan
17-07-2006, 01:06 PM
I think the batsman should walk and bowlers/fielders shouldn't appeal unless they know it is out.



























Unless we are playing Australia:D

Halftime Gold
17-07-2006, 01:34 PM
Originally posted by Radders
Tough one really. I saw Nasser Hussain given out LBW so many times (once by Bucknor) when the ball came off the middle of the bat first that I think maybe you shouldn't walk. It evens itself out in the long run and in cricket nowdays there are very few 'Walkers' , Gilchrist is the only one that.

I'd say thats the key difference between Holding's day and today, when almost nobody walks your not gaining an unfair advantage by not doing so yourself.

srs9jps
17-07-2006, 08:40 PM
I have to say that when I'm playing and it is an obvious nick I walk so that I get a reputation as a 'walker', then when I get a little nick I dont walk and it usually doesnt get given:o

Golf Boy
17-07-2006, 09:54 PM
Boycott -" I only walked when i knew i was out "

Cozier- " from what i remember Geoff, you only walked when the umpires finger went up "

Boycott- " That's when i knew i was out ".

Aki Aki Aki
18-07-2006, 11:48 AM
Originally posted by Radders
When was this??

Probably never.

Of course the Aussies are such an honest, fair bunch of cricketers. They wouldn't dream of bending the rules :eek:

GreatGonzo
18-07-2006, 11:58 AM
Originally posted by Aki Aki Aki
They wouldn't dream of bending the rules :eek:

Nope they just break them! :D

Never trust a convict!

oz_da II
18-07-2006, 12:59 PM
Originally posted by GreatGonzo
Nope they just break them! :D


Let's hear an example, Gonzo.

oz_da II
18-07-2006, 01:02 PM
Originally posted by Radders
When was this??

BBC website.

Tuesday 28 June, 2005
Edgbaston one-dayer lost to rain
NatWest Series, Edgbaston:
Australia 261-9 v England 37-1
No result - rain

Kevin Pietersen claimed the catch low down at third man, but the batsman stood his ground before being sent on his way by the umpires.

Television replays cast considerable doubt as to whether the ball was taken cleanly.

GreatGonzo
18-07-2006, 01:04 PM
12 months on and you are still moaning?

Did television replays show the ball had grounded? NO

oz_da II
18-07-2006, 02:22 PM
Originally posted by GreatGonzo
12 months on and you are still moaning?

Did television replays show the ball had grounded? NO

I'm not moaning, he asked when it happened and I provided the requested information.

No danger of you answering my question, eh Gonzo?

Radders
18-07-2006, 02:39 PM
Originally posted by oz_da II
BBC website.

Tuesday 28 June, 2005
Edgbaston one-dayer lost to rain
NatWest Series, Edgbaston:
Australia 261-9 v England 37-1
No result - rain

Kevin Pietersen claimed the catch low down at third man, but the batsman stood his ground before being sent on his way by the umpires.

Television replays cast considerable doubt as to whether the ball was taken cleanly.

Ta Oz_da

Although it isn't quite as clear cut as Ozeagle was making out. Many clear catches have doubt cast on them when the batter stands his ground so I don't think you can call KP a cheat for that.

Radders
18-07-2006, 02:40 PM
Originally posted by oz_da II
Let's hear an example

Lillee's aluminium bat must have been close but I guess that was bending the rules rather than breaking them! ;)

oz_da II
18-07-2006, 02:48 PM
Originally posted by Radders
Ta Oz_da

Although it isn't quite as clear cut as Ozeagle was making out. Many clear catches have doubt cast on them when the batter stands his ground so I don't think you can call KP a cheat for that.

KP couldn't have been 100% sure he took the catch, therefore in theory the batsman should have been not out. Replay shows the ball in contact with the ground underneath his fingers. Lara has done it in the past with similar catches and told the batsman he wasn't sure therefore not out, he's done this on more than one occasion.

Lillee's embarrassing fiasco was something to do with a bat sponser. A bit silly really. If he got hold of a few, the ball would have looked like a potato.

oz_da II
18-07-2006, 02:51 PM
Originally posted by GreatGonzo
Did television replays show the ball had grounded? NO

It did actually.

How's the wicketkeeping going, Gonzo? :clown:

Radders
18-07-2006, 02:56 PM
Originally posted by oz_da II
KP couldn't have been 100% sure he took the catch, therefore in theory the batsman should have been not out.

He's a big ego but he doesn't strike me as a cheat. I think he was sure in his mind at least. Maybe wrongly so.

Radders
18-07-2006, 03:02 PM
Originally posted by oz_da II


How's the wicketkeeping going

I keep wicket actually.

Took a good catch standing up the other day and this teenage little sh*t (friendly cricket) just stood there. Umpire didn't hear it and was quite young too so couldn't really moan. As our bowler was walking back the batter was looking at his bat so I leant over, pointed at his bat and said "thats where you hit it mate" "oh yeah, well spotted" he said.

Little shit.

GreatGonzo
18-07-2006, 03:11 PM
Originally posted by Radders
He's a big ego but he doesn't strike me as a cheat. I think he was sure in his mind at least. Maybe wrongly so.

To be fair at the time did he know what taking a catch felt like, wasn't that at the time he had dropped about 6?

Radders
18-07-2006, 03:19 PM
Originally posted by GreatGonzo
To be fair at the time did he know what taking a catch felt like, wasn't that at the time he had dropped about 6?

I think the one dayers were before he started spilling them in the tests but not too far from the truth!

oz_da II
18-07-2006, 03:27 PM
Originally posted by Radders
I keep wicket actually.


Me too.

Ever appeal for LBW's? :clown: :moo:

THB
18-07-2006, 04:30 PM
Originally posted by oz_da II
KP couldn't have been 100% sure he took the catch, therefore in theory the batsman should have been not out. Replay shows the ball in contact with the ground underneath his fingers. Lara has done it in the past with similar catches and told the batsman he wasn't sure therefore not out, he's done this on more than one occasion.

Lillee's embarrassing fiasco was something to do with a bat sponser. A bit silly really. If he got hold of a few, the ball would have looked like a potato.

It's not always clear cut, but if you are going to castigate KP then surely Justin Langer deserves worse, his claimed 'catch' off (i think) Nasser Hussain, was cheating of the worst kind.

THB
18-07-2006, 04:47 PM
Originally posted by THB
It's not always clear cut, but if you are going to castigate KP then surely Justin Langer deserves worse, his claimed 'catch' off (i think) Nasser Hussain, was cheating of the worst kind.

Vaughan not hussain.

chelmsfordeagle
20-07-2006, 06:07 AM
i alwyas walked when i knew i had nicked out or was run out. I have before taken what i thought was a good slip catch to be told be teamates that it had hit the floor.

as one of the commentry team said the other day players who dont walk when they know they're out can't then complain when they get a bad decision.

oz_da II
20-07-2006, 06:22 AM
Originally posted by THB
It's not always clear cut, but if you are going to castigate KP then surely Justin Langer deserves worse, his claimed 'catch' off (i think) Nasser Hussain, was cheating of the worst kind.

How was that cheating? It took the 3rd umpire about 5 minutes to come up with the conclusion that it couldn't be proven either way. Therefore it was not out.

Vaughan should have done what a lot of sporting players do (such as Brian Lara, even Shane Warne does it) and taken Langer's word for it and walked.

joyce the voice
20-07-2006, 06:56 AM
Originally posted by srs9jps
I have to say that when I'm playing and it is an obvious nick I walk so that I get a reputation as a 'walker', then when I get a little nick I dont walk and it usually doesnt get given:o

which is why walking is a bad idea. cheat.

OldPeanutSeller
20-07-2006, 07:02 AM
I would always walk if i knew i had hit the ball and that the catch was clean. Obviously not for lbw - as Dickie Bird said, lbw is a matter of opinion, not a matter of fact. Likewise a close run out - you're so busy trying to ground the bat you're not in a position to judge whether you are in or not.

On the grounded catches. There was an interview some while back with guests Bobby Robson and Nasser Hussain. Hussain said that there were times when the fielder was not sure whether the catch was clean or not. Bobby Robson argued quite forcefully that that was a load of rubbish and the fielder always knew. I must admit, i would go with Bobby Robson.

grey ghost
20-07-2006, 07:30 AM
Originally posted by Oisin
Either its a gentlemans game for batsmen, bolwers and fielders or its not. Its crazy to say batsmen should walk but the fielding side can appeal everything


agree with this 100 %


when i was a kid playing cricket , i was involved in a close run-out with an opposing batsman , i didnt think it was out so didnt appeal (my eyes were on the ball and the stumps i was trying to knock over) , the umpire after the next ball , told me i should have appealed , he would have given him out DOH !
sorry that doesnt really help the debate , just thought i should get it off my chest .

MasterYoda
20-07-2006, 05:08 PM
funnily enough playing yesterday I took a catch behind and the umpire gave the batsman about 10 seconds to walk before the finger went up.

I think it was the umpire just giving the batsman the opportunity to do the decent thing but he didn't.

Then later in the match one of our boys nicked behind and was given not out. We heckled him a bit for not walking but he argued that as they hadn't walked when the opportunity arose why should he.

I'm not sure which side of the fence I'm on.

Also, On the plus side I scored my first EVER four in front of square.
On the negative side I ended up in casualty with a suspected broken finger (luckily its just bruised)

PengeEagle
20-08-2006, 07:49 PM
Walker!

PengeEagle
20-08-2006, 08:15 PM
Originally posted by oz_da II
It's cheating and a disgrace.
In situations like that you are well aware whether you have caught the ball or not. If you have a doubt you must call the batsman back. Benefit goes to the batsman everytime.

Like Brett Lee did in the 1st test of the ashes?