THATS NOT CRICKET!

It is on this occasion pretty poor...its not a nick..and its not like going down in the box....punishment due.

I would make him Sir Stuart for that ,your Majesty if you are reading this?

its all about winning today,(not only in cricket but in life' sad).we cant have unlimited appeals so how about run reduction if no appeals left.

Steve Waugh and about 99% of Aussies wouldnt have walked either

sewter.. i would expect this disgusting behaviour from the Convicts..but not from England.

Dar has been ****g hopeless. Should be fired off for the rest of the series. If he can't see that he should not be in charge.

Well played Stuart Broad

legendary stuff

sofiakenny

Englishmen dont walk either-havent for years

I'm afraid Broad should have walked - irrespective of past decisions; right or wrong - the fact is he could have trundled back to the dressing room. Any subsequent arguments by any team about any decision are trite and meaningless.He could have made a simple statement about fairness - the umpire gets the blame but he missed it - he shouldn't but the player could have adressed the mistake. Let's hope any subsequent arguments posted about doubts, etc are ignored

if that is the case sewter i will no longer watch cricket...only golf left where the players have decent morals.

Quite sewter.  This is the modern game and to those who don't like it I suggest they retreat to a quaint village green in somewhere like Somerset to watch a quiet game and enjoy a glass of cider.  Never forget it was the Oztralians - mainly under Steve Waugh - who created this moral vacuum in the game.  It just makes it more satisfying to watch little Michael's bottom lip quiver into an abject seething mess.  What you reap is what you sow.

woods

sofiakenny I admire your stance and you are right about golf BUT in cricket very few walk whereas in golf very few cheat

geordie1956
12 Jul 13 19:33
I'm afraid Broad should have walked - irrespective of past decisions; right or wrong


Indeed.

Shameful from Broad......imo.

Whats worse is the fact he actually motioned to suggest he hit it...

Yes Sofia , It's just not cricket as we are led to believe of the sport. I expect the authorities will be taking some action on this one. Match changing cheating deserves strong punishment. Playing golf yesterday morning , was in a bit of thick lush grass just off the green and had a double strike when doing my chip. Messed up my score but straight away but my hand up for it. It saddens me when professional sportsmen cheat and think it's OK and justified if not noticed by umpires or referees. Ultimately I'm sure Broad will pay for this one way or another (Unless he has a conscience like Thierry Henri)

Congratulations for owning up in a ten bob golf match ,but this is international cricket and the Ashes where the Aussies will play every trick in the book as will every other nation ,Broad did not cheat he stood his ground and waited for the decison of the umpire which was not out,England have not had the rub of the green in this match and my advice to Bairstow would be to take a leaf out of Broads book because you do not walk ,nobody does.   


I applaud Broad for his competitive spirit and will to win ,as for Bairstow I would be having a word with him for walking it is not the done thing leave it to the umpires and the referral system ,which Clarke needs to wise up on.

  As for the Ashes the best team will win it .................................England.

Big mistake from the Aussies to waste their two reviews. Save them for obvious mistakes.
Need a decent captain who can tell your bowler that we won't be reviewing the LBW as ball was missing.
Broad getting abuse because the Aussies made a mistake.

Neil Robertson just called a foul on himself in this mornings snooker semi final and joked to the crowd Broad would not have done that.

Jul 13, 2013 -- 3:53AM, Mexico wrote:

Big mistake from the Aussies to waste their two reviews. Save them for obvious mistakes. Need a decent captain who can tell your bowler that we won't be reviewing the LBW as ball was missing.Broad getting abuse because the Aussies made a mistake.

I agree with your comment, Mexico. However, given the magnitude of Marais Erasmus' ineptitude as third umpire in this Test match, even if the Australians had used a review on this incident, Stuart Broad would probably still have been given 'Not Out'!

a player can sometimes think hes hit it when he hasnt,if the umpire casts doubt then its common sense to have it checked ,the aussies couldnt check it because they d used up their reviews - so he was right not to walk and the aussies loose out because they ve not kept any reviews available - thems the rules and sport is all about playing best to the rules - players cant go making their own decisions up .

I don't like cheating but Broad is playing by the same rules as most Australian batsmen.  Knowing the rules is the most important thing and quite often we don't.

I was 14 when I thought Tony Greig had betrayed cricket.  I later found out that he hadn't.  The real cheats were people like Doug Arsole, Peter May and ex Prime Minister Sir Alex Douglas Home for not selecting Basil D'Oliveira in the original MCC Squad to South Africa.

I feel a little angry at the abuse the Umpires are taking too.  The main problem has been the human error from the third Umipre and also the mechanics of decision making.  I don't think Aleem Dar has had a complete mare except for the Broad decision.  Generally I think the Unpires do a good job but for Trott's dismisal let me just say after all the technical evidence was presented and with hindsight not foresight the jury is split 50/50!

As for Broad what a ****..../he should have stood his ground just now to be consistent!

I would not be applauding him off either, he knew he cheated so did everybody else, that's the game he plays but don't expect to be congratulated.  For me it makes the people who applaud him just as bad!

Huge credit to Dar that it didn't matter how vociferous the appeal was, he still didn't allow it to influence his judgement.

the appeal was not at all vociferous as the dismissal was so routine the Australian players took it for granted it was out

Dar should not get another test during the remaining Ashes tests

Hmmmm,Hmmmmm Clarke not walking again has this happened before?  He knew he hit that and was hoping for some reason hot spot was not going to show

He is a convict so that behaviour is expected.

Yes but we are fed up with being honest losers against the likes of Pakistan,Australia & co Clarke KNEW he hit that and was hoping hot spot did not show up case closed my lord and a knighthood for Sir Stuart for playing the game  .  Bob Willis was aying that when he won his series in Australia ,England did not get a SINGLE LBW decision in the WHOLE series .

Another pitiful attempt from an Englishman to take the moral high ground AH. You KNOW what Clarke was thinking? Are you that kid from The Shining?

dont care if he walks or not.

the whole review system is utter bollox, there should be somebody respected and competent upstairs watching who can call a review when a call looks iffy. would be much fairer and simpler than the current system.

The standard of umpiring has fallen well below standard and the present system is utter bollox

Another pitiful attempt from an Englishman to take the moral high ground AH. You KNOW what Clarke was thinking? Are you that kid from The Shining?

Can you give us an aussie perspective on why your captain used your last review on a nick that everyone heard and saw in real time let alone replay please - he must have known he nicked it so what exactly was his thinking? Many thanks.

How the feck can I? I saw what you saw. I am not the kid from The Shining, are you? Many mind readers on here it seems.

I thought both Umpires did pretty good today.  The DRS worked when Rogers was given out and an honest mistake was made and rectified.

Clarked showed himself up again.  Slagged of Aleem Dar yesterday but tried to con the system today, justice!

So you can't even give an Aussie perspective - it's just seems such a bafflingly inept thing to do that i presume the aussie meeja are pretty angry about it?

England celebrated wildly when wicket-keeper Matt Prior took a low catch off Stuart Broad’s bowling but Clarke waited as Aleem Dar checked with square leg umpire Kumar Dharmasena to see if the ball had carried
When Dar eventually gave Clarke out he immediately referred the decision, prompting another delay before being given out again, swinging the Test heavily in England’s favour.

Australia lost 3-3 in 18 balls once Clarke fell, going to stumps at 6-174 still needing another 137 to achieve a record run chase of 311 at Trent Bridge.

Asked later if he thought he had hit the ball, Clarke replied: “Obviously not. I referred it.

“I knew I had hit my pad. I asked my partner up the other end and he certainly wasn’t convinced I hit it either so I referred it.

“Actually when we both looked at the big screen we couldn’t see anything so we were pretty pumped that we made the right decision.

“Then I was given out and had another look when I came in the change room and there was a little spot there on Hot Spot. That’s the way it goes. That’s how the review system operates.

“I’ve said to our team that if you feel you’re not out then back your judgement. And if the review doesn’t go your way we move on.”

There was some irony that Broad became one of the most agitated England players during the long delays given the amazing reprieve he received a day earlier.

He slashed the ball into Brad Haddin’s gloves and it flew to Clarke at first slip but Dar inexplicably gave it not out and Australia had used both its reviews so Broad stayed.

He was 37 at the time and went on to make 65 in a game-changing partnership of 138 with centurion Ian Bell.

Ironic indeed Broad was agitated. I'm shocked a gentlemen as classy as he has ever been agitated in his life. Nothing but sunshine and rainbows emanate from that man.

rhino

Two points about that:

Firstly, there has been a lot of talk about usage of the review system. Supposedly it was brought in to address the real howlers which are occasionally made (like the Broad one). If Clarke is telling his players that if they feel they're not out to back their judgement then that's the problem. There needs to be a greater degree of certainty than is currently being shown by Australia or they will continue to get bad decisions go against them. Lots of players don't like to get out and that feeling can cloud their judgement. They need to be more clinical.

Secondly, the Broad decision was described as inexplicable. I think this is unfair because it is suggestive of something underhand. I think it is perfectly explicable on the basis that it was one of those howlers which sometimes occur. I'd be pretty sure that in real time and with one view of the incident that Dar thought what he saw was Broad play and miss and it hit the outside Haddin's glove and go through to first slip.

If Clarke is telling his players that if they feel they're not out to back their judgement then that's the problem. There needs to be a greater degree of certainty than is currently being shown by Australia or they will continue to get bad decisions go against them. Lots of players don't like to get out and that feeling can cloud their judgement. They need to be more clinical.

Agree wholeheartedly. They need to re-evaluate their use of the allocated reviews. Nice to see someone actually show some signs of intelligence in putting their views across. Suggesting he was trying to con the system is ridiculous, questioning his use of the reviews is definitely not.

why bother having team reviews when you can just have someone neutral sat watching the tv to review? seems a pointless faff top me. most decisions you can see in about 3 seconds of a replay if it was out or not.

its not like tennis, where it wouldnt be practical cos youd be reviewing every other point, theres only a few decisions every day that would ever need to be looked at again. bloke watching tv ever says decision stands get on with it or hang on a minute we'll review this one. simples.

On Fox Sports yesterday Brendan Julian was suggesting that the third umpire should still be able to overrule on howlers after a side has lost their reviews. What should happen is that a captain saves his reviews for the howlers and should not need the third umpire to bail them out once they've wasted them.

However, I also think that the bowling side should receive an additional review every 80 overs when the new ball is due.

Chris Broad the ICC official who charged Ramdin and Father of S.Broad clears Stuart Broad. News by NDTV sport,Guardian and the BBC. Conflict of Interest? What is really happening with Stuart Broad's automatic selection by ECB? IS Stuart BRoad is really injured or not good enough? So many things to answer. I thing @BCCI is the best answer for this Parasites... ;)

If clarke is telling the truth in that interview then Aussie are in trouble over the next few years! It was obvious he nicked it, the bat is nowhere near anything else and a nick was heard yet he 'felt' he hadn't nicked it? Contrast the way England used their reviews (turned down 1 that Aus would prob have used and 1 that they almost certainly would have) both of which turned out to be close but no cigar.
Bairstow walked without the ump giving him (obv the Aussies have overlooked this) and Root went when if he'd referred it he may well have been let off but on the balance of prob (having nicked it like Clarke but even fainter) he decided not to. Don't forget hotspot isn't the be all and all - if a nick is shown but hotspot doesn't pick it up (as would have happened with Clarke it was that obvious) a batter is still out. If Clarke hadn't wasted the review before the Broad 'dismissal' it wouldn't be an issue, if Aus continue to waste their reviews it will happen almost every bloomin match!

Broad should have walked, disgraceful behaviour showing contempt for the game. The integrity of Cricket itself is more important than one match, Ashes or not.

Did Broad bother to look at the umpire yesterday before he walked off?

Clarke knew he'd nicked it, just watch him immediately look back, keep digging your hole Rhino, talk about blinkers.

I'm the one with blinkers... Some of you blokes are out of control with your patriotic tunnel vision and I'm wearing blinkers. Open your eyes man ffs

1-0 England despite the Aussies getting the rub of the green on decisions ,get on 5-0 .

You'll need better bait champ...

You are arguing the fact that Agar was out and Root and Trott were not?

  OK we will swim with that , the losers always have a good story to tell .

Shallow victory which counts for less than Zilch given Broads behavior. That and the fact that so many English people on here defend what he has done, leave a bad taste in the mouth. I always looked upon England as a country that put Sportsmanship ahead of everything else and I dare say that's still the case with a good number of Englishmen . I know this forum is not representative of the majority of sportsmen in England but the views expressed here make me wonder whether the ethos has changed in England from days of yore.

I agree, that Broad, should have walked and I expect, had vital decisions, not gone against England, beforehand, he would have gone

It changed (in cricket anyway) just a bit after Steve Waugh became skip of the Aussies JEF.