Should ICC charge Ponting for claiming a grassed catch ?

[Rajesh Sethi]

I don't think that Ponting realised what happened. In fact, his ignorance at the press conference goes a long way toward proving that. He dived full length and had caught the ball in mid air until his hand landed on the ground. The ball didn't spill from his hand, which is why he thinks it was a clean catch. Everything happened so quickly (if you watch the video rather than a single still), so at the time he grounded the ball, he was already starting his appeal. There was a very similar catch by Sangakkara off Pietersen in the second test, when he caught a slips catch with his hands above the ball and the ball touching the ground at the same time (Pietersen was given out as the decision was not referred to the 3rd umpire). Sangakkara was not charged. In fact, all the English commentators agreed that he probably was unaware that the catch was technically not clean. Unlike Latif, I don't think Ponting would be found guilty of knowingly claiming a non-catch. Therefore, there is no point in pressing for him to be charged, which would end up looking like a fruitless act of spite. We should follow the English example, which gave the player the benefit of the doubt in terms of realising what had happened. At this point in the series, conciliation is required, not more calling of opposition cheats.

[DesiChap]

Rajesh A spade should be called a spade. We should not bend over backwards for cheats.

[aussiefan]

I didnt like how Ponting was trying to dictate terms to Umpire Benson when Ganguly was given out. On top of that, he clearly denied everything in his post-match interview regarding the Dhoni catch being grassed and the arrogance in which he spoke That's where Ponting should be held accountable.

this is one of the most silly threads i have seen. he called out to umpire because the captains before the series agred to take fielders word on catches, hencen ponting saying he caught it and benson then giving it out. if you dont like an agreement then back out of it, like you want to of the tour. better yet, send some indian umpires over and you can call it how you like it everytime.... i think you guys are going too far here....but go on and keep creating ridiculous threads if you like. i want my click back :haha:

[suraj]

this is one of the most silly threads i have seen. he called out to umpire because the captains before the series agred to take fielders word on catches, hencen ponting saying he caught it and benson then giving it out. if you dont like an agreement then back out of it, like you want to of the tour. better yet, send some indian umpires over and you can call it how you like it everytime.... i think you guys are going too far here....but go on and keep creating ridiculous threads if you like. i want my click back :haha:

ok- please explain what you are saying; was the agreement stupid because it was made with a cheat or was Ponting wrong in cheating?? I agree with you its hard to ***** and moan once something has been agreed upon but is it that hard when the original intent was based on trust?? If we look for an analogy lets say you trust me as a friend staying home with your wife for a night- if I end up sleeping with her do you have no right to complain now because you trusted me??? Maybe I even gave you a verbal promise that I will not enjoy her hot body that night but I still went ahaead and made her moan with pleasure all night- now should you be considerd stupid or I should be considered evil? Have some perspective my friend- very easy to say let go of things when its not your team that suffered

[chanakya]

this is one of the most silly threads i have seen. he called out to umpire because the captains before the series agred to take fielders word on catches, hencen ponting saying he caught it and benson then giving it out. if you dont like an agreement then back out of it, like you want to of the tour. better yet, send some indian umpires over and you can call it how you like it everytime.... i think you guys are going too far here....but go on and keep creating ridiculous threads if you like. i want my click back :haha:

The captains agreement was with each other not with the umpires. Was there any mention that the umpires can take the fielding captain's word? The Umpire had no right to ask Ponting so I am not going to fault Ponting for relying on the word of his fielder. If you can't believe in your team then you can't expect the rest to be. However Ponting's appeal for Dhoni's catch needs to be looked at very very closely, I am certain to a point that ponting knew he had grassed it but still went to appeal. He dragged the ball on the ground. For someone who has the time in the world to judge the fastest bowlers in the planet and is one of the best fielders he cannot be that unaware. And as for his denial in the press conference. Al Capone - I have spent the best years of my life giving people the lighter pleasures, helping them have a good time, and all I get is abuse, the existence of a hunted man.

[aussiefan]

i would also like to see a charge for this poor display of sportsmanship, and bad, bad, foul, foul language by bhajji... wtf is he thinking in not leaving crease? guy has a history of this...... X3Ms37yt3lg ____________________________________________________________________________________ the more you complain about it the more people will have to bend over about it

[The Outsider]

aussiefan, not only Harbhajan but Ganguly was criticized by most here for standing his ground in the '05 Pakistan series. So, what's the point?

[Ram]

Thats hardly the point though. FACT: 1) Latif caught & grassed it, Ponting caught & grassed it 2) Latif knew it (but says he doesnt), Ponting likely knew it (he says he doesnt) 3) Latif appealed, Ponting appealed (infact demanded) 4) Latif was banned, Ponting was not. Now (2) is the key. Since both players deny it, its a subjective call from the ICC referee. But there is enough merit for a case against Ponting.

As you have said, no.2 is indeed the key, but I would like point out a few things. The key thing to ponder about is not whether the catch was grassed or not, but whether the player willfully tried to cheat the player. In this age of technology and cameras, it is incredible to think Latif thought he could get away with claiming a catch that he clearly grassed, just because his back was facing the umpire. In Ponting's case, he didnt make any obvious attempt distract or hide from the on-field the fact that the ball had actually touched the ground as he completed the catch. Considering the nature of the catch, I am willing to go by the line that, he may have, infact not known the catch was grassed, but there is absolutely no question of that in Latif's case. We shouldnt be discussing whether the appeal is legal or not, but whether there was a deliberate attempt on the part of the player to deceive the umpire. In Ponting's case, evidently, there isnt one. The case wont stand against him,IMO

[aussiefan]

aussiefan' date=' not only Harbhajan but Ganguly was criticized by most here for standing his ground in the '05 Pakistan series. So, what's the point?[/quote'] shwetabh, i was not aware of this and am happy to admit it.

[The Outsider]

shwetabh' date=' i was not aware of this and am happy to admit it.[/quote'] The Harbhajan incident that you posted above was minor and probably not discussed much but a top order batsman and captain, Ganguly, waiting for the third umpire got a lot of us in fits. You have joined the site recently, but I am one of the posters who gets called anti-India many a times. And I am even willing to go to the extent of ignoring all the leg befores and caught behinds as judgement errors by the umpires. But how do you explain away these system irregularities : 1. Symonds not being given stumped by the third umpire 2. Bucknor not calling the third umpire 3. Benson asking for Ponting's word in Ganguly's dismissal(the agreement between captains has nothing to do with the umpire, once a batsman stays put the umpire has to follow the rule book) The above three point to a massive breakdown of the system at best and hand in glove approach with one team at worst, either ways demanding serious investigation.

[Donny]

A nonsensical poll as an obvious option is missing.

[The Outsider]

A nonsensical poll as an obvious option is missing.

Which is? I'll add it it in.

[Donny]

You have to ask ? If your poll was to have any relevance, it would have an option for someone like Richie Benaud to be able to participate.

[shree_dharan]

I think more than penalising Ponting and Co.. we need to be more prudent in reframing the rules of the game. It could be a Steve Bucknor/Ponting or a Benson today but someone else tomorrow. Using technology could actually jeopardise the freshness of the game but why not use it for the right purpose??

[Chandan]

I think more than penalising Ponting and Co.. we need to be more prudent in reframing the rules of the game. It could be a Steve Bucknor/Ponting or a Benson today but someone else tomorrow. Using technology could actually jeopardise the freshness of the game but why not use it for the right purpose??

We have been banging our heads over this issue since last two-three years and 90%+ people agree with the introduction of technology for umpire's help. But this is not going to happen overnight, as we all know. First the majority of 10 countries representatives in ICC have to agree with the idea, then have a proposal for a proper system and then practice the system in the domestic cricket for at least one season. Only then can it be introduced in international matches. So obviously that is a long term goal. We are discussing about the short term things in the aftermath of Sydney test.

[The Outsider]

You have to ask ? If your poll was to have any relevance, it would have an option for someone like Richie Benaud to be able to participate.

It's not a poll on the legitimacy of the catch but on actions by governing bodies.