Stuart Broad cleared of being against the spirit of the game by the ICC Panel

[Sachin=GOD]

Indirectly it is ' date=' if Broad is not at fault then there is no question of he is breaching spirit of cricket.[/quote'] Broad was not wrong it that what he did was not cheating but this does not mean that his actions were not against the spirit of the game. He should have been banned/fined.

[msb1991]

Broad was not wrong it that what he did was not cheating but this does not mean that his actions were not against the spirit of the game. He should have been banned/fined.

By your argument, all batsman who nick the ball and know it (i.e. a very large percentage) should be fined?

[Crookbond]

Broad was not wrong it that what he did was not cheating but this does not mean that his actions were not against the spirit of the game. He should have been banned/fined.

Name me one batsman who was banned/fined for not walking.

[Sachin=GOD]

By your argument' date=' all batsman who nick the ball and know it (i.e. a very large percentage) should be fined?[/quote'] most such cases are not so clear - here it was very clear that he had edged it so IMO he should have walked and such actions should definitely result in fine/ban to discourage others.

[Sachin=GOD]

Name me one batsman who was banned/fined for not walking.

and how does that mean that they can't start it now? This way they are only encouraging other batsmen to do the same in such a situation.

[Crookbond]

and how does that mean that they can't start it now? This way they are only encouraging other batsmen to do the same in such a situation.

I want to ask you - Why now? This has been going on since the 70s. Gavaskar, Srikkanth, Geoff Lawson, Tendulkar, Clarke, AB DeVillers, Kaif, Graeme Smith, Strauss, Jaywardene, Ponting etc. all have not walked once in their careers. I have never seen people coming out and saying they should be banned/fined. I want to know "why now" - what pulls the trigger NOW.

[G_B_]

I think we need to axe this "spirit of the game" crap to begin with. What Broad did was clearly against the spirit of the game and is similar to 100s before him have done. It does appear to be paradoxical that we dont ban batsman for not walking yet ban somebody for claiming a catch which they have dropped. Both are against the spirit of the game. Lets have a rule for dissent and that should be the end of it.

[msb1991]

most such cases are not so clear - here it was very clear that he had edged it so IMO he should have walked and such actions should definitely result in fine/ban to discourage others.

Most cases are not clear? What does that mean. 95% of cases, it is very clear whether the batsman has edged it or not. Close to always, the batsman knows he has edged it or not.

[Haarkarjeetgaye]

ha ha. Papa ne broad ko maaf kar diya. england sab ka daddy

[Ultimate_Game]

Broad should never have been charged in the first place. As a batsman it's his prerogative to wait for umpire's call. The umpire phucked up and not Broad's fault, just like it was Bucknor's fault in that Sydney Test and not Symonds' for not walking.

[Mark]

Regardless of the result. I do hope the English media pick up of this "conflict of interest" of a father judging a son.

I think you and the OP may have misunderstood the Guardian article. This wasn't an official ruling. It was simply Broad snr. replying to a journalist's question.

[coffee_rules]

Yeah right, barbie's a broad.

[coffee_rules]

a batsman knows whether he hit it if its a thin edge or thick edge' date='so he should only walk if its thick edge-what degree of deviation constitutes a thick edge?[/quote'] If the slip catches it, then it is a thick edge.

[bulbul]

If the slip catches it' date=' then it is a thick edge.[/quote'] How? When spinners bowling many times keeper caught will be of thick edge.

[bulbul]

Wait till we hear how Broad Sr. didn't participate in the deliberations on his son's actions.

:dontknow: 1.Ranjan Madugale is Match refree. 2.Umpires need to report first before refree takes any action Now can any one tell me the chances of umpire reporting this as a issue :giggle:

[rkt.india]

a batsman knows whether he hit it if its a thin edge or thick edge' date='so he should only walk if its thick edge-what degree of deviation constitutes a thick edge?[/quote'] No, it is not that black and white. Some times, you don't realize. If you have played cricket, you would know. Sometimes, bat hits the pad and ball takes a think edge, you find it difficult if you hit the ball or not.

[vamos_rafa]

i dont agree' date='every batsman knows if he has hit it with his bat.[/quote'] Not necessary. There was an incident when we toured England in '11 with Dravid. His shoe laces hit the bat and yet the umpire gave him out. He consulted Sachin, who also thought it was out, and he did not review. The replays later on showed that there was no nick and the sound was of his shoe lace hitting the bat. Having said that, with technology you can never be sure. On topic, I don't think walking or non-walking is any issue. There is only a moral predicament which states whether a batsman should or should not walk. But, for such huge edges, it's a different case IMO. It's like a batsman gets bowled and waits for the umpire to raise his finger.

[carnish]

:dontknow: 1.Ranjan Madugale is Match refree. 2.Umpires need to report first before refree takes any action Now can any one tell me the chances of umpire reporting this as a issue :giggle:

+++ Aleem Dar will never accept his mistake. He will blame it on the bowler saying he shouted earlier and hence I could not hear the nick. Nobody wants a :shot: in his head.

[ganeshran]

ICC website is registered by GoDaddy.com.

:hysterical::hysterical:

[Raghav_12]

Not necessary. There was an incident when we toured England in '11 with Dravid. His shoe laces hit the bat and yet the umpire gave him out. He consulted Sachin' date=' who also thought it was out, and he did not review. The replays later on showed that there was no nick and the [b']sound was of his shoe lace hitting the bat. Having said that, with technology you can never be sure. On topic, I don't think walking or non-walking is any issue. There is only a moral predicament which states whether a batsman should or should not walk. But, for such huge edges, it's a different case IMO. It's like a batsman gets bowled and waits for the umpire to raise his finger.

Sound of shoe lace hitting the bat :hmmmm: that must have been preetty loud. Difficult for umpire to miss.