Two days after Adam Gilchrist‘s slaughter of the lambs in the finals of the 2007 World Cup, cricket’s fans and fanatics are still coming to terms with the onslaught that fetched 149 off just 103 balls and took the truncated game away from the Lankans even before they began their reply.But, how legal was the wicket-keeper’s innings?
And, as a direct corollary, therefore, how authentic is Australia’s ‘Cup triumph?
By Gilchrist’s own admission, he had “something” in his left glove all through his knock. In fact, upon reaching the century, Gilchrist first doffed his bat towards his teammates in the pavilion, acknowledged the applause of the spectators, and then kept repeatedly pointing to his left batting glove with his right hand.
“I had a little message, to wave to someone at home in Australia about something in my glove,” he is quoted as saying at the post-match media conference.
The intended recipient of that little message was his batting coach and former Western Australia player Bob Meuleman, also a noted squash player. Turns out that upon Meuleman ‘s advice, Gilchrist had been carrying a squash ball in his left, bottom hand to help him with his grip.
“His (Bob’s) last words to me before I left the indoor training centre where I train with him in Perth were, ‘Well, if you are going to use it (squash ball), make sure when you score a hundred in the final you show me and prove to me you got it in there’. I had stayed true to that.”
That’s as clear a confirmation that Gilchrist had the squash ball in his left glove to help him with his grip during his stupendous knock. But that’s also where questions over the legality of Gilchrist’s innings, or the seeming lack of it, come in.
Can a batsman carry an object—in this case, a squash ball—not connected with cricket to help him on the field? Did he secure the prior permission of the umpires? Was the fielding side captain aware of the use of the squash ball? Did Mahela Jayawardene approve its use?
And, above all, and in a manner of speaking, did Gilchrist’s “hidden ball” give him an unfair advantage in knocking the daylights out of the Lankan bowlers?
These are hypothetical questions, of course, but cricket—a sport governed by mighty “Laws” not lowly rules—is always full of ifs and buts that leaves cricket haters plain mystified but keeps cricket lovers breathlessly debating the whys and wherefores till kingdom come.
Law 3 of cricket deals with the umpires. Subsection 6 of law 3 deals with the conduct of the game, implements and equipment. It reads as under:
Before the toss and during the match, the umpires shall satisfy themselves that
(a) the conduct of the game is strictly in accordance with the Laws.
(b) the implements of the game conform to the requirements of Laws 5 (the ball) and 6 (the bat), together with either Laws 8.2 (size of stumps) and 8.3 (the bails) or, if appropriate, Law 8.4 (junior cricket).
(c) (i) no player uses equipment other than that permitted.
(ii) the wicket-keeper’s gloves comply with the requirements of Law 40.2 (gloves).
The well-known Karnataka umpire M.R. Suresh, citing Tom Smith‘s New Cricket Umpiring and Scoring, the manual on the implementation of cricket’s laws that umpires use, says the list of permitted external items for a batsman are a helmet, leg guards (pads), hand gloves and, if visible, fore arm guards.
Spectacles and jewellery are classified under clothing items.
Gilchrist’s squash ball was, therefore, neither a piece of protective equipment, nor a clothing item, and was most certainly not visible to either side or the umpires.
In other words, Law 3 (6) (c) (i) specifically prohibits a player from using equipment other than that permitted. And nowhere in cricket’s 42 laws is there a mention of a squash ball as a permitted item.
If Dennis Lilee‘s aluminium bat and Ricky Ponting‘s graphite-coated bat could be deemed illegal, if Hansie Cronje‘s earpiece experiment was not OK, if Scott Styris had to remove all the bandage from his right hand before he could bowl in the Super 8 match, can Adam Gilchrist’s “hidden ball” pass muster?
No law can, of course, take the sheen away from Gilchrist’s knock. Batting with a normal grip against the world’s best bowlers is tough enough, batting with a squash ball in one of your gloves is worse. To score 149 scintillating runs is, well, incredible.
And, as a “walker“, Eric Gilchurch is among the fairest cricketers to have ever graced the field.
Still, two questions arise: if the using a squash ball isn’t OK as per the laws of the game, is his innings legal, does it count? And if it doesn’t count, can Australia claim to have won a hopelessly one-sided and farcical victory?
***
(Many thanks to E.R. RAMACHANDRAN for pointing out the anomaly)
***
Churumuri story on Yahoo, The Courier-Mail, The Sydney Morning Herald
This does open many possibilties in the innovation of Bat, provided no action takes on this issue, which may well be the case.
Perticulrly the way the Bat handle is made. How about handle with groves engraves for fingers and thumb. Exactly for the purpose gilchrist used the squesh ball, the bat does not turn when hit. or for that matter a handle with bulges in right places to avaoid bat to turn or vibrate when hit powerfully.
I would like some Indians to use that kind of bat, if no action is taken against giulchrist, during Bangladesh tour. , With all the resource backed power of Indian cricketers we can expect some courage and innovation Atlest.
Good times ahead for ICC Chief…. fun for us!
LikeLike
To say that Gilchrist broke the rules in spirit at the best is one thing and to infer that the bat handle made him hit that superb innings is an argument too far! For example, Pakistan stroke players did fail not because they did not have the bat handle, but because of i) arrogance or ii) for a fist full of dollars,I would say probably the latter, which resulted in a coach’s murder. In the same token Tendulkar failed because he couldn’t throw the bat properly at the incoming ball!!
No body is raising the eyebrow, not the SriLankans, and my guess is it will blow over as a storm in a mug of West Indies rum!!
LikeLike
Its perfectly legal! The batsman hide golfball or Football upon his comfort any where ! Even between the legs also if he feels safe!
LikeLike
Debatable
But the ICC has too many problems to worry about cricket these days;)
LikeLike
as a regular player of both squash and cricket, i am still wondering how a squash ball can fit in. Squash ball is quite hard till it reached the right temperature.
LikeLike
I’m very glad to see this being discussed. I just posted on this topic a little while ago at: http://eye-on-cricket.blogspot.com/2007/05/cyborg-batsman.html
Would appreciate any comments. I’ll link back to this blog so that others can find this very interesting discussion!
Thanks,
Samir
LikeLike
Is this M R Suresh from Vasu Agarbathis and studied in NIE? We used to call him Robin Smith.
LikeLike
I must thank you for taking this issue in an international forum. Being a good cricket fan, I too had the same question with Gilchrist’s batting. If ICC allows this, then should other games such as athletics allow drugs that stimulate their muscle to be used? It is a serious question that should be answered by the ICC to the world and cricket fans. Cricket is a game of gentlemen, they should show the sportmanship and should obey the rules and laws othere wise it would be. just a war. so let see what the out come.
LikeLike
I am wondering what magic it will make by holding a squash ball in the left hand while batting. It’s really irritating to see that you have come up with questions regarding the legality of gilchrist’s innings. Legal or illegal, let’s accept the fact that it was a wonderful, once in a lifetime innings played by Gilchrist.
I have a feeling that that you just cannot digest the fact that Australia came up so triumphantly despite out the fact that you have praised gilchrist innings. But somewhere down your heart you are not accepting the fact that they are a far superior team than others. We ran close to them in WC 2003 but still there was a big margin.. This WC 2007 Srilanka was close to them but still the big margin remains.
It is time to accept the fact graciously that AUSTRALIA are far ahead from the competitors in cricket. They are the KING of CRICKET.
LikeLike
Mr N S RAO Can u pl remind me our days.
LikeLike
Thanks for the interesting article. As a Sri Lankan who watched the match I was disappointed for the following reasons.
1. A World Cup final should be played for a full 50 overs so both sides can utilize their full strengths. In this case the advantage was for Australia given their top three heavy hitters.
2. The Australians had better light and were able to bat through the 38 overs whereas the Sri Lankans had to deal with rain and the batsmen lost their rhythm when playing a stop and go game.
3. If the Sri Lankans had won and Sanath Jayasuriya had a squash ball in his glove the Australians would be screaming “bloody murder” and would probably take it up with the ICC.
In my mind this was not a fair World Cup final. This is not to say that the Australians would not have won anyways but I think it would have been a much close game. The only batsman who scored was Gilchrist all the rest had a tough time including Hayden. We should take this matter up with the ICC.
LikeLike
Pingback: How legal was Adam Gilchrist's hidden ball? « Lanka Page
Pingback: How legal was Adam Gilchrist's hidden ball? « Sri Lanka Cricket
Read your piece on the above and had to tell you that some of
us felt the same. Thank you.
Its good that you have raised those questions. If Sri Lanka had
won and our batsman had used such a gimmick I would have
loved to see what the world would have had to say.
Nobody is even talking about it.
I m going to write to the ICC asking for some serious answers
LikeLike
Thank you immensely for questioning the legality of the Australian”so called” world cup victory. You,being an Indian National have courageously brought this very important question out in the open,while our nation’s(Sri-Lanka)press,has chosen to be dumb. After reading your article, I realised how true your argument is, and as a Sri Lankan and a great lover of the game, I have written two letters to the Sri Lanka Cricket Board and to the ICC. Please do not let the ICC & the Australians walk scot free of this very obvious injustice. God Bless.
LikeLike
Ive seen umpires get riled up over players with extra padding? there was
always a few eyebrows raised when jayasuriya was bowling with padding on
his fingers.
squash balls have the property that it bounces more at higher
temperatures. Players tend to warm up balls by bouncing them on the
ground prior to play. As a rally progresses, play is complicated as the
ball usually becomes hotter and speeds up. so guess the elasticity of a
squash ball under a crickter’s glove.
cmon this is like a supercoiled spring on your hand. what’s differnce
between this and using steriods to pump up your muscles?
cricket shud be an equal contest between bat and bowl. very
dissappointing from gilly. i’ve written to the icc and the mcc. i
suggest y’all do as well.
LikeLike
This is terrible, for a small and poor nation like ours to play against such
cheats. Our country is in turmoil. Still we rose against The Giant Australians and played a clean game and topped it with a Superb Gentleman speech from
Mahela. In the hearts of all Sri Lankans, we should Claim ” World Cup
Championship”= Who cares about others.
LikeLike
IF Srilankans care for legality they should think about Murali’s bowling action. As a bowler in a club cricket n my early life his action looks suspicious to me., every time he bowls. People like Ranjan Madugale in the ICC administration bring up ‘racism’ whenever this is brought out. IEven after ‘hiding him’ for a fortnight, he was ineffective. Chadrasekhar too was affected in his bowling arm by polio, but he action were immaculate and passed the muster.
LikeLike
Your article is highly appropriate and very disturbing. But I doubt if the respective authorities will take this matter to the next level for review and actions. Or in real terms – dis-qualify the World Cup Winning (as they did during an Olympics relay game, that 2nd winner Australian team became the Winner)
LikeLike
Your article sounds very interesting and should not be taken lightly. I would strongly recommend that you should bring this to the attention of the British Media i.e. all the English Publications and more importantly the governing body of the I.C.C.
It’s sad that the game of Cricket has been bought to this low level especially by an individual of the top Cricket nation of the world – AUSTRALIA. Please
do not hesitate to act fast and have this matter exposed not only by the British Media also the AUSTRALIAN PRESS as well.
LikeLike
HOW LEGAL WAS ADAMS SQUASH BALL HIDDEN IN HIS GLOVE ?
Thank you for higlighting the issue. Watching Adam show his glove hand to the pavillion made me think that he needed a change of glove as it had an unusual bulge possibly resulting from a damaged inner padding. I didn’t have to wait long until Gilly himself admitted to his gimmick.
THEN ON IT WAS A MATTER OF DEBATING HOW LEGAL IT WAS AND WHETHER SL HAD ACTUALLY LOST THE GAME.
I THANK THE WRITERS WHO HAVE ELABORATED THE PROS AND CONS OF THE USE OF A SQAUSH BALL ENHANSING THE BATTERS CAPABILITY TO SWING THE BAT AT WILL WITHOUT FEAR OF LOSING THE GRIP.
So the much talked about hammering of the elite Sri Lankan bowlers was not difficult after all, as Malingas pace could not turn the bat to create an edge to the slips…..the rest is history but should it be left to the crooks to go on and continue with such treachery for the sake of a game.
Well we Sri Lankans are a special lot…..we do not make a hue and cry over spilt milk, but given that the team had to face many forces that went against them should be given a thought.
1. The WC finals must be played for the full 100 overs if the idea is to find the true WORLD champions.
2. Should the game be affected by rain the match must be postponed to the next day, and failing which the CUP must be shared.
3. An amendment to the LAWS to deem null and void a WIN should the winners be found to have cheated and the CUP be awarded to the other team.
4. The incompetent umpiring and the body of five who failed to decide even though the LAWS on a rain affected game is so clearly written must be taken up at the highest levels of the ICC.
5. Rudi Coertzen and all other umpires who made clear irresponsible judgements must be fined and/or banned from standing at matches of this level. (It must be reminded that had these umpires been ASIAN the avction would have been taken very promptly, just like in the case of ASOKA DE SILVA) This is not racism but one tends to think so when inaction and ommission always suits the non ASIAN umpires or for that matter a player MURALI for one)
6. What controls have been put forward by the ICC on Umpires who could be having connections with BOOKIES (The SL/NZ semi final made me think so owing to the two obvious LBW decissions that went against SL.)
SO TAKE HEART SRI LANKA YOU ARE NOT ALONE AS IT IS SO MUCH EVIDENT WITH THE SUPPORT YOU GET FROM ALL SPHERES.
Given the circumstances it will be only pertinent to take full control over the ICC and clean it up if we ardent cricket fans are to see this gentleman’s game be preserved and the spirit of cricket kept clean.
Thank You
LikeLike
Surely the ICC must investigate this serious matter and take appropriate action (awarding the win to Sri Lankans) against the Australian team as this is something similar to using prohibited substances in all the other sports.
LikeLike
Gilchrist was somehow managing to get miss-hits over the boundary on a fairly big ground. Judging by his expression and reaction when showing off his “hand with ball”, he seemed pleasantly surprised as well. Therefore it seems pretty obvious that the ball did provide an unfair advantage. What needs to be decided therefore is if this was legal. In my opinion it is not.
As a Sri Lankan, I did feel some sort of closure to be convincingly beaten by a great Aussie team in a game which did not have the crucial 50-50 LBW decision (which so often seems to) go there way or a bowler being called a chucker. This closure and contentment has now been taken away by a mere squash ball.
LikeLike
If Gilchrist is investigated, Murali should also be investigated for his bowling action as this contributed to Srilanka’s success to reach the semifinal and Final.
LikeLike
It is really quite shocking to witness this whole sqaush ball issue especially in a world cup final. Way back in 1987 I was aware that a thick piece of soft rubber under the glove would help grip the bat better and also impart a lot of extra power to the ball. Timing also improves tremendously and the had remains quite “soft” when playing a defensive stroke. I am truly flabergasted!!!
LikeLike
Give it up. Sour grapes.
LikeLike
All you critics are reading into this the wrong way.
You do realise that Gilly put the squash ball in his glove, not to help him smash any opponent all over the park cause talent has nothing to do with it, but to actually hinder him so he could give the opposition a fighting chance!
LikeLike
Yeah….
Gilly definately cheated.
Just like those pooftahs from Pakistan who threw the game like a pack of bitches for some greenbacks.
Just like Hansie Cronje did a couple of years back.
Just like your mum did when I f[]cked her in the poopa.
When will all you f[]ckwits realise that gilly is a freak of nature, a savant , a once in a lifetime player ..just enjoy the innings for what is was. – Pure Genuis.
LikeLike
Gilly is a living ledgend! There has been a big pattern over the last few years in that he can be out of form game after game and then all of a sudden just come out firing. Although he is growing older he is still regarded as one of the most leathal batsman ever to play cricket, this innings, although it will most likely go down as the greatest and most crucial world cup knock to date, it’s not the first time Gilchrist has hit such a leathal innings.
This is simply another case of expert and eletric batting that Gilly still is able to perform, it can’t and should’t go down as anything illegal, what’s next? Banning chewing gum because it could help stimulate the feilder’s minds resulting them in playing better???
LikeLike
Perhaps Steve Waugh’s little red rag that he used to have in his pocket should be investigated as well. Might have increased the pressure on a thigh muscle while he was batting that made him the champion he his. You silly, silly people don’t be so ridiculous.
LikeLike
The fact that this has even been brought up by people is a disgrace, anyone who believes an injustice has been done is clearly an idiot/sore loser and how on earth can Australia winning the toss and deciding to bat first be unfair??? This article is outrageous and you do nothing for the commonly held belief of those outside the sub continent in that you are incredibly sore losers and clearly jealous of the success of a truly great cricketing country. Next time waste your time writing an article on the debacles going on in your own corrupt backyards before you decided to throw mud at those worthy of congratulations and praise.
LikeLike
Sounds like excuses to me……..every team that came up against the mighty Aussies got what they deserved. Now all you sub continent fanatics can go and crawl under a rock. The WC is where it belongs and we dont care that we are not popular winners(S.Gavasker) Aussies play the game hard at all levels and that is why we have such depth of talent. Even our school boy sides are cut throat. Until the other nations around the world start developing grass roots they will never be competitive. You cant just employ an Aussie to coach you at senoir level….you need to get the basics right from a very young age….ask any Under 14 school boy what the penalty is for dropping a catch. It is commonly stated that Australia can field a Second string side and be competitive…..well its true.
LikeLike
There is nothing illegal about Gilchrist using HALF a squash ball in his glove to help his grip. Steve Waugh and a number of other batsmen around the world have different shaped handles on their bats for the same reason to assist in the grip of the bat. There has been no law broken here. Inserting half a squash ball into your glove is no different from wearing batting inners or a batsmen talking to himself before each ball is bowled to get him to concentrate on the coming ball. It does no damage to the ball (as the aluminium bat did), gives the batsmen no greater power (as the carbon coated bats were alleged to do) and was merely a technique tool that Gilchrist used. Anyone who claims that the laws were broken are clutching at straws. You should all just enjoy what was the magnificance of Gilchrist’s innings as it was one to be treasured.
LikeLike
We call this sour grapes in Australia. At least he doesn’t chuck the thing!
LikeLike
Law 3(c)(i) says the umpires must satisfy themselves that no player uses equipment other than that permitted.
The umpires were satisfied. End of story. It’s like any other decision by made the umpires. The umpires gave a lot of players out or not out during the game. End of story. Similarly, the umpires were satisfied about Murali’s bowling action. End of story.
As to the future, unless a law of cricket provides that a squash ball is deemed to be “not permitted”, it is assumed that it is permissible, just like glasses, contact lenses, spikes in your shoes, thick socks, sunglasses, sunscreen, the box …. etc etc etc.
LikeLike
Tough ….they received a payback for the 1996 final and they crying like little kids. To me Gilchrist made the squash ball part of his batting glove, Batting gloves are made out of all sorts of different natural and synthetic materials anyway. I remember some batman years ago had six grips on their bats to assist with grip, nothing was said about that. Unless the ICC makes such a use of this material illegal for international cricket, any batsman can quite happily attach a 1/2 cut up squash ball in their gloves. Ah by the way he was dropped caught and bowled early in his innings and went on to hammer the bowling everywhere. I have noted the Sri Lankan fans has somehow forgotten about that dropped catch that cost them the match. Catches win matches.
LikeLike
OH and by the way………..I hear from reliable sources that Indian cricketers were more worried about attending sponsor events in the Carrabean rather than attending training…probably explains their performance. Put them all on match winning fees and watch the improvement. No win = no money…I apologise to the Sri Lankans I do not mean to include you in this jibe
LikeLike
Before you silly Sub Continent people put a Fatwa on Gilly, let me tell you a story.
Back in the 1980’s in Baseball a struggling baseballer (who I will leave as unknown) was told he could play better by wearing a G-String and a Bra underneath his clothes. He tried this and his batting went from a mere .250 to .450. He was later told by the person who told him this that he made it up to make him get back his confidence.
My point is that having a squash ball in your glove has no proven scientific advantage, and comes in line along with lucky Underwear and Special Water. It merely is Psychosematic. Gilchrist already had the talent, he just to get some confidence back.
That’s my two cents worth.
LikeLike
Gilchrist scored 2 fifties in the world cup before the final, so he was hardly out of form. I also remember gilly being dropped when he was on about 30, are you going to blame the squash ball for Fernando dropping the ball?
How many players wear inners under their gloves? They aren’t listed on the permitted list of external equipment. Does that mean every person who wore inners cheated?
Finally, if having a broken squash ball in your glove is tantamount to using illegal drugs, where was the outcry when Pakistan picked 2 players who had tested positive to steroids only last year in their world cup squad ?
LikeLike
I love how people jump on the back of the Aussies when something like this comes up.
Adam Gilchrist is the batsman he is because of his ability.
He didn’t have a squash ball in this glove when he hit a near world record 100 in the Ashes test match.
One question has to be asked – what was the *reason* for the squash ball? It could be answered .. “padding” ? Maybe ne needed extra padding in that glove. If this is the case, how different is it to using padding in a show or something similar.
What if he put cotton wall in there (the glove). Would it be the same effect? and reaction?
LikeLike
I think your article answers itself. According to the laws of the game, “Before the toss and during the match, the umpires shall satisfy themselves that…”
The onus is clearly on the umpires to rule on the legality of these things before or during a game. At any rate, how about we play the game again, this time the Sri Lankans can use this revolutionary performance enhancing rubber and see if the result is any different!
LikeLike
You want to question the legality of Adam Gilchrist’s squash ball? Have a look a muralitharans bowling action, and then tell me who is a cheat!!! Aussies won fair and square, undefeated in the world cup, with no serious contenders!!! Sri Lanka seems to be sucking on some sour grapes now, and wishing that they were half the side of the Australian juggernaut!
LikeLike
Like ice skaters wearing boots one size too small for them to help them concentrate, gilly gave himself a hindrance to help him concentrate. next thing you will be saying is that the colour Steve Waugh’s red hanky affected the bowlers sight.
What a pack of sore losers you all are. That’s why most other cricketing countries fail where Australia succeed, far too envolved with BS politics and whinging. Keep it up though, can’t wait for 4 in a row!
LikeLike
Australia should probably also be stripped of the 1999 trophy. I wasn’t there, but I’m sure for the whole tournement Steve Waugh was playing with the assistance of a lucky red towel
LikeLike
You guys are really clutching at straws …have some dignity in defeat!
LikeLike
It is all well and good saying the squash ball gave him an edge while batting but is there any proof to this matter? One instance of something occuring does not mean that it has made all the difference. Gilchrist scored one of the fastest centuries in test cricket and did he have the squash ball in his glove then? The previous 14 centuries Gilchrist has scored at one day level, again did he use the squash ball then? If the legality of the squash ball is called into question which its purpose was to lessen the amount he used the bottom hand on the bat, does this mean with batting grips we call the legality of them into it. When players have 4 or 5 grips on their bats, how will they feel jarring, or if they want to use their bottomhand more they will put 2 or 3 half grips on the bottom half of their handle so that the bottom hand is used more prominently.
Gilchrists innings should be hailed for what it is, a marvellous display of power hitting. If Gilchrist had not done the deed one of the other players would of stepped up to the plate.
There are so many increases in cricket technology that something as small and insignificant as a squash ball should be disregarded. There are so many items of clothing which give performance enhancing characteristics, as skins clothing, shirts which allow more ventilation and even wearing two pairs of socks while bowling. How can it be decided which of these give an unfair advantage and which do not.
In January of 2006, Gilchrist scored a belting century against Sri Lanka, and was leading the international one day rankings as a batter only a month later.
It is only just over a year from that date, it is obvious Gilchrist is not as good as he once was, but he is still able to show flashes of brilliance.
We should admire Gilchrist’s innings for what it was, one of power hitting and great timing, admire Australia for having a comprehensive tournament and beating all comers, admire Sri Lanka for having a good tournament and playing a good brand of cricket, and laugh at South Africa for choking as they always do.
LikeLike
Gilly was dropped… he got out for 30 odd no one would be complaining. Its SL’s who let him score a big score not a rubber ball in a glove
LikeLike
Does having a squash ball in your glove help when you’re grasping at straws?
I’m sure even the amateur batsmen from Ireland can afford a squash ball – let’s see them (or anyone else) smash 100 off 52 balls at the WACA. If all it takes is a squash ball then let’s see them smash 149 in a world cup final against the 2nd best one day bowling attack in the world. Ha!
I’ve got some advice for those who want to complain – put a squash ball in your mouth.
LikeLike
lets hope we now see all the Sri Lankins wearing a squash ball next time they play. In fact lets make it compulsory and see just how they “improve”. maybe we should let everyone else also bowl with a bent to straightening arm.Try copying Murallis action yourself. You cannot bowl with that arm movement and not be straightening your arm. just for the record, I can copy his action, don’t play cricket and can spin it further than him. Bad losers I say.
LikeLike
Haha…get over it you clowns.
At best it straightened his grip on the bat. You dont think Gilchrist has the power and class to play and innings like that by himself?? He is the best at it in world cricket and has proven that over many years.
Anyhow if he hadnt made a ton, Ponting or Hayden would have.
LikeLike
Gimme a break, this is pitiful!
Sri Lanka have not lodged a complaint, have they? Surely if this is illegal, they would have been all over it.
Look at the scorebook and then come back to me and tell his innings wasn’t legal.
Game over, move on and get a life!
LikeLike
Being Asian myself, its frankly embarassing the amount of sooking and sour grapes currently being shown by my fellow cricket fans from the sub-continent. If Australia won unfairly in 2007, then perhaps we need a rematch of 1996 again when they had to bowl when the dew was on and none of the Aussie bowlers could grip the ball properly. I haven’t heard Australians ask for this, so it seems like SL fans want their cake and to eat it too.
SL lost because the much vaunted bowling attack was rubbish. Murali and Vaas did nothing, and god knows why fernando was even selected. Gilchrist took advantage of this. And when SL went to bat, Jayasuriya decided to bat slowly. When you’re chasing a big total, he needs to pull out a quick 70 off 40 to set up a platfrom for Jayawardene and Sanggakara, just like how Gilchrist set up Ponting and Martyn in the 2003 final. Instead the SL top order batted slowly and never got SL anywhere near the required run rate. Its a bit hard to argue “could have been” if they were nowhere near in the first place.
To now complain about trivial things such as half a squash ball in a glove is frankly embarassing to yourself, and insulting to cricket fans worldwide.
LikeLike
Some of you guys are kidding! I tell you what, give all the Sri Lankan batsmen a squash ball to put in their glove and we’ll see how well they bat. They still have to hit the ball, which few of them did as well as the Aussies. Blaming the rain and this and that stinks of being sore losers and nothing more. The fact is, the Australians have been undefeated in 29 matches in the last three world cups, and this last game is the only game that Gilly had a squash ball in his glove. If he didn’t rise to the occasion someone else would have as has been proven time and again.
LikeLike
Bring on the rematch. In fact pick your best world XI, or subcontinent XI, let them play as a team for 12 months, pick your ground and we will still annihilate you. You’re all a pack of whingers. It’s time the whole ICC was disbanded…. Cricket has become a farce BECAUSE of all the whinging that goes on.
Accept that you lost, or challenge us to a rematch.
LikeLike
Gilchrist is a wonderful cricketer and an honourable one at that.. No doubt if Gilchrist thought he was cheating (and at this point it is still debateable) he may have done things differently and the game may or may not have had the same result…not any cricketting pundit would be able to disagree that it was Gilchrist who finally made the difference in the two teams on that particular day. Australia is definitely a stronger side and have a record to prove it, and as much as Australia has taken the game to new heights, they have undoubtably taken the game to new lows as well. Even a mild cricket fan knows their weapon is their dirty tactics on and off the field which has nothing to do with the game of cricket and to back them up off the field they have an all time low grade public force. Even their ancestors, regardless of their social status would probably have been more inclined to side with hundred thousand British prisoners in cheering the Sri Lankans on. Australia cricket should open their eyes as why the rest of the world detest their brand of cricket and not be fooled into thinking the rest of the world hates them because they play hard and are champions…it would help them to look at the West Indies and how they dominated the game for much longer, but instead of being detested, they were idolised and loved. Australia boast quite rightly about playing the game hard at school boy level, it would do them good to teach the younger generation the meaning of the word ‘sport’ before teaching them a sport. Its not howmany matches you have under you belt Australia, but in the manner you were superior.
LikeLike
Many thanks KP on behalf of Genuine Cricket Loving fans all over the world. I mean a BIG BIG thank you for bringing this up. Infact I was talking to one of my friend few days ago to seek some leagality about the whole Final match they played that day. Was complete disgrace to the whole cricket world and diasappointment to all true cricket. I say shame on you ICC and blame on you Sri lankan cricket official who were there that day including Captain Mahela Jayawardena for not objecting to play the FINAL on those circumstances and such a wet pitch in pouring rain.
It’s embarising to say my belief of the ‘ official’ are not well qualified cricket officials. They are there as in most cases simply because there political connections to the Government. They would dare to say or raise any issues with ICC or match refferee simply because their are lack of knolwedge about cricket.
However, we should not give up fighting for the right cause, in the name of the game of cricket Sri Lankan deserve more than this. They shouldn’t have to put up with all these Duckworth Lewis or none of the other crap. For god sake it’s the Final Match. They should have played it next day in full, to be fair to all parties Match should have played 50 overs for both sides.
LikeLike
It is amazing that most responses are from Indians and Sri Lankans and quite understandable, when one is on the losing side even the extra blade of grass on the pitch that could have sprouted after the game commenced is grounds for decent on the result.
When one considers that the rules of the game were changed to accommodate an illegal bowler speaks volumes, Australia booted suspect bowlers who were called for illegal deliveries and never played in another test or first class game, so the moral of all this is learn to accept that the better side won on the day and even given equal weather conditions the result would not have been different, statistics of the entire world cup say Australia won throughout the tournament with relative ease and never lost more than 6 wickets in any game. They were a far superior outfit in all departments and that is the fact, put that in your pipes and smoke it, like it or not.
As for all the analysis on the Squash Ball, half you idiots know little on the principals and effectiveness of it. A squash ball’s design is to absorb/cushion impact for a start but never returns equivalent energy until a lapsed time but does so only free from any constraints, the ball in a glove is restrained so the deduction can only be that it is an absorbant of energy rather than product for added energy.
I suppose the next argument would be “would contact lenses be an unfair advantage” or let me throw this back to the Lankans “bring back Ranatunga so he can bat for 2 mins then fake a cram and call for a runner.
LikeLike
1. If Sri Lanka batted first and Australia 2nd under the same circumstances, can Australia win the final? NO
2. Some in Australian media kept on highlighting the CONTROVERSIAL bowling actions of Malinga and Murali. But they always miss out Shown Tait and Bret Lee bowling action. No question that Taity and Lee chuck and they should go and get themselves clear like the way Murali did. Then we’ll know the amount of bending they have when they bowl at 90+ KM/Hr.
3. What will happen if Sanath take a squash ball or Malinga use a glove to grip the ball when they face Australia again in Australia?
About the final outcome..I strongly feel that Australia would have won the final had they played a 100 over match on that day irrespective of who batted first.
ICC.. you really fuc**d up the entire game of cricket during this world cup.
LikeLike
The reason that Gilly used the squash ball was to loosen his grip, it had nothing to do with getting extra power from a warm ball. I would suggest that extra padding in the area would of given him the desired effect. Remember Gilly told everyone about this its not like he hid it. Gilly is one of the great sportsmen in world cricket. As an Australian I find his walking infuriating at times. But that’s the sort of man he is. It was one of the great innings by one of the great cricketers, get over it!!!
LikeLike
Bruno,
Neither Tait nor Lee have been either named as suspect or called for an illegal delivery so get your facts straight, those Australian bowlers that were called were banned, no appaels were made to the ICC, who as weak as piss and resorted to keeping you beggars in the cricketing world rather than taking the attitiude “on your bike go with your bows and arrows”. Your nation has been the biggest trangressors of the rule book.
The question of would Australia have won had they batted first, simple answer to that is your Captain won the toss and decided that the advantage was his to field and gain the advantage turned out he was thibnks through his arse and not his brain because the prediction was for scattered showers and with the DL system the side batting first does have some benefits and that should have been his consideration.
The truth to part of that answer also is Australia were undefeated in the tournament not something Sri Lanka could boast of and all matches were won convincingly, had the 50 overs been made on the same propositions you could have had a bigger hiding like face a total of 450, and there is noway as long as your arse point to the ground is the Sri Lankan team got depth in the battiung to rival Australia,
As for Malinga non of the Australian press questioned his action bar saying it was unique and hope you know the meaning of that word if not refer a renowned dictonary.
As for Sanath he can have a bloody coconut in his glove if he thinks it would aid his batting.
But I will agree with your last 2 comments Australia has consistently demonstrated to be the better team in all departments and the ICC is not worth a rat arse.
So the moral is learn their traits implement it and you will end up being the beneficiary rather than sulking and thinking of all the “if” they stand stiff in the corner like part of my anatomy.
LikeLike
Adrian Berenger, u are such a dumb arse bro. I support australia and i think that game would hav been alot closer if it hadn’t rained. Bro i noe australia are good but the lankans are just behind them and the game that was played on the 28th didnt give the lankans any chance cause of the continued rain in their innings. But yeh, aussies prob would hav won, but i reckon the lankans could hav beaten them aswell.
Lets hope the next worldcup final is Aus vs Sl and this game not be a failure as the last.
LikeLike
Only people who find it difficult to face a bowler complainT and non in Asian region complaint about any bowler as we have courage to face anyone at any pace. Courage is what is required loosing and winning is second topic. Why only Australians keep on complaining about illegal bowling actions.
No one does it as much as Australians do it, that’s for sure!
Well we as Sri Lankans’ accept it that it just was not our day but the according to rules & regulations of ICC there can’t be any other equipments worn by the player (Batsmen, Bowler, Fielder or W/Keeper) other than the permitted materials and i don’t think there is any chance of a squash bowl coming to a legal wear for a cricketer.
And we Sri Lanka/ India/ Pakistan and other Asian countries don’t have a habit of pointing to someone just because we lost, well we do accept that Australians have played good cricket and they have the ability to do so well that’s good for them. But in character wise Australians are not having a good sportsmanship, i knew that Adam Gilchrist was a good & genuine sportsman where in a match against Sri Lanka few years ago he walked off (the ball kissed his Glove) after a caught behind decision went against the Sri Lankans. But i don’t know how legal is the Squash ball.
Well this comments are not because we lost the World cup but how strange is when looking at other comments people (may be from Australia) have made using some uncharacteristic words such as Idiots/Arse and like wise to someone like Sanath Jayasuriya who has changed the way of scoring runs in mid 90’s well not in a total way but at least in a bit. Well and good Sri Lanka, India & Pakistan have produced many cricketers who have reached many milestones where Australians just can only come close to them but they cannot reach them.
WELL THAT’S VERY RUDE OF PEOPLE USING SUCH WORDS.
LikeLike
The world Cup Final shpuld be Cancelled or the Cup should be given back to Sri Lanka. It was totally Illegal. Aussies could not face Sri Lanka, thats why they used illegal methods.
LikeLike
Aadil,
You are the type of moron that still believes the world is flat, grow up man you people were still swinging from trees when the rest of the world passed you, there is no point in procastanating the “ifs” the next round is to be soon, we have 2 tests start thinking of some excuses believe in them and go ride your bike for comfort. The fact that you have a bowler who bent the rules then had them changed via a rats arse ICC does not counter well. I feel for every scalp he has been credited because in reality they were not out.
LikeLike
Its funny how Aadil you mention that only Australians complain about suspect bowling actions, we do it because we are taught at a young age bowl properly or you’re not getting a bowl at all.
If your action is even remotely suspect you get taken out of competition and have to have remedial work done on it, before Muralitharian was tested the limit was 5 degrees, now it is 15 degrees, does this not seem suspicious when he was the only spinner in this period to be tested?
The ICC is scared of doing anything to offend the sub-continent sides, how ridiculous is it for a two test series to be played between India and Australia, or for the entire series to be tailor made for the Indian pay tv companies. They are even talking about getting rid of the Lilac Hill festival match because it wont fit in to the “schedule” of the touring side.
People keep on forgetting that the main rule which governs all rules in cricket is to play within the spirit of the game, that went out the window when players would fake injuries (Ranatunga), contrive results (Cronje), and have bowling actions that the allowable tolerances were changed to allow to stay in the game (Muralitharan).
The spirit of the game was lost a long time ago and something as small as a squash ball should not take away from the complete and utter dominance Australia has shown.
LikeLike
Further is anyone aware a stack of wicketkeepers have used “steak” or similar inserted inside their gloves. I say “steak” as that was once used but most have moved on to a more sanitary solution. From memory Ian HEALY or Rod MARSH who both suffered numerous broken fingers in their careers had to resort to something like this….sorry Heals if it wasn’t you. Unfortunately both are Australian so I am sure some whingers will pick this up and run with it but this is done worldwide! You try keeping to bowlers bowling in excess of 140km/hr with sore/broken fingers. When they are the keeper for the whole test match they don’t have much choice when an injury develops. Is a steak listed as official cricket equipment….of course not…is it illegal….of course not. Any law is subject to interpretation and precedence and must also be interpreted in the spirit it was written. People who think the squash ball is illegal, I hope you aren’t considering a career in law.
KEEPING IT REAL
LikeLike
Guys and Gals I played a game of cricket today and used a squash ball in my glove. I found that it didn’t overly help. You could see how if positioned correctly it could help you grip the bat but funnily enough I had to grip the bat HARDER and wiggle the ball into the right position for it not to cause me to have to grip the bat too hard. In my relatively short innings I actually started to feel a bit tired in my hand towards the end from the extra strength required to grip the bat. I have seen some ridiculous suggestions that it improves the power it certainly doesn’t do that.
Here are the FACTS:
In cricket you are allowed to use gloves!!!
Purpose of gloves:
(1) To protect the hands – they have padding!
(2) To enhance the grip on the bat
If Gilchrist finds his grip is improved by inserting a squash ball then it would be silly to suggest it could be ban. Any attempt to do so will just result in a glove manufacturing inserting one inside the glove and then he isn’t “carrying” one. They couldn’t ban it because the glove would just be doing its job. If they tried to claim an actual squash ball couldn’t be used the same effect could be achieved through use of padding sawn into the glove on the palm….. again you couldn’t ban this as padding is currently in gloves!
So point is the glove and squash ball in it is legal. If Gilly finds the squash ball helps the glove do it’s job of gripping the bat better, good luck to him.
For those that think it made Gilchrist some superman, well you haven’t been watching Gilly very closely. Sure it was his best innings in the tournament, but just because you have a “quite” tournament does that mean you are not allowed to score in the final. People who obviously don’t understand statistics have analysed his cup and used this to say the innings was above his abilities. Sorry guys but statistics show a batsman scores knocks above and below his average and the fact that Gilly had a tournament up until the final below his career average (statistically more reliable then the smaller sample of a few innings shows) doesn’t mean his next innings shouldn’t be a good one. In statistics the odds of a coin flip being tails is still the same (50%) regardless of how many heads have appeared in the preceding four tosses. Gilly is an amazing batsman that’s why he scored the knock. It’s not as though he hasn’t done it before. Point is he just rose to the occasion. Sri Lanka had their chances to get him out but they……dropped him…..strange that. Gilchrist has a top one day score of 172 so it is not as though he hasn’t done it before.
Statistically their have been NUMEROUS innings where batsman have risen to the occasion. One that comes to mind is Jason Gillespie scoring over 200!!! Sometimes it is just your day. A good batsman has these days more often then a poor batsman and Gilchrist when he has his day is just awesome. So amateur statisticians go get a degree in statistics before using them in an abusive manner to apparently support a flawed argument. Oh yes I do have one so I could go into the topic on more depth but I think any cricket fan would understand that the history of cricket is littered with innings where batsman have risen to the occasion.
Here are some facts on Gilly. He has scored FIVE one day hundreds against Sri Lanka. In fact he has scored only two fifties against them, making this the ONLY country he has scored more one day centuries against then fifties and not just more but 5 to 2!!! His average according to cricinfo in one day cricket against Sri Lanka is a touch under 48 while his career average is around 36 in one day cricket. So point here would seem to indicate that there is significant statistical evidence that maybe Gilly just likes the questionable bowling action of the Sri Lankans, even though he himself has questioned the legality of Murali’s action.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/cricket/2009911.stm
Further in 2002/3 ICC world cup series Gilly scored 99 from 88 balls against Sri Lanka and how did he get out…they ran him out!!! This innings of 99 is one of his “Fifties”. So really this makes him one run/run out away from having a record of 6 one day centuries to 1 fifty against Sri Lanka!!!!!
In 2006 in Brisbane Gilly scored 122 against Sri Lanka and his hundred came of 67 balls!!!! WHERE WAS THE SQUASH BALL HERE???
In 2003 and then in 2004 Gilly was voted international one day cricketer of the year.
In June 2005 Gilly was voted the “scariest batsman”. Refer:
http://content-usa.cricinfo.com/cbs/content/story/211318.html
Not a good thing when the “scariest batsman” seems to love your bowling. Sri Lanka lost the world cup not due to some beat up myth of the squash ball but because Gilly is just an amazing batsmen whom they haven’t figured a way to get out once he gets going.
By the way I scored 22 of around 25 balls with a squash ball in my gloves……no Adam Gilchrist here.
Keeping it real
LikeLike
Neutral you are not like you name states….On what grounds does anyone really think that Australia is not presently the deserving champions. They swept all before them in the world cup including a domination of Sri Lanka Twice! Yes the game was reduced to 38 overs and ideally it should have been played the next day to try to get it to be 50 overs but it was made 38 for both teams and Australia won a long time before the light became an issue (the game was over people when Australia scored that many runs but I will say Sri Lanka made a respectful fight at least). If it had of been a 50 over match I am sure with the likes of Hussey still to bat Australia would have got 380 and likely tried to push the 400 mark again. Sri Lanka would have just been beaten by a greater margin.
Every team has their day in the sun. For now it is Australia but history tells us this will change and perhaps Sri Lanka will emerge out of this as the next team to dominate who knows. Whoever it is I will enjoy it and enjoy their cricket… I used to follow Allan Border battling the huge battle of trying to subdue the mighty West Indies in the 80’s and I enjoyed this more than some of the dominating wins Australia has recently executed. Point is I enjoy my Australian cricket win lose or draw. In the 80’s we lost more to the West Indies than we won, but it was great cricket and no whinging here when we lost. I didn’t go off at have arrogant Viv Richards was or how much they sledged instead I congratulated them for their great cricket and intimidation. I also respected some of the Aussies for giving them a run and standing up.
What I find disturbing about this site is that people have to get personal. I feel sorry for you guys and girls that feel your point is better proven by sledging others in a manner that borders on racial or discriminatory. Sure debate their opinion but don’t attack based on race, age ,sex or NATIONALITY…. This goes BOTH ways!!! As an Australian I am embarrassed by some of the racist crap people push but quite frankly some generalisations made against Australians is just as bad. People Australia is a good cricket team but don’t let your jealous instinct at not supporting the present best national team lower you to judging all Australians on the basis of a game!!!!
I hope the world can grow up and start seeing the real problem here; it is just a game of cricket, made for a bit of fun. For those who have posted comments degrading Australians on the whole over a game of cricket you make me feel glad we won the cup and I hope it hurts (but that is me stooping to your level). For those that support Sri Lanka but have conceded the better team won, then I say to you that you also have a great team and will one day dominate world cricket I am sure. For you I will be glad when that day comes.
But back to the main issue it is a game people, just enjoy it. I read a comment on yahoo that said “Ultimately….rain & light chaos prevented Sri Lanka from winning the World cup 2007 still some fans demand srilakns shut their mouth about this UNJUST….what a joke…..we dont worship Kangaroos we worship ..god”. People this is a load of crap…..this is sad. By posting things like this you are just highlighting your ignorance not only of the game of cricket but of Australia and the world. People say the stupidest things and then infer they are speaking in the name of God. To start with, anyone who is religious should respect all other people above all. It seems to me so called religious people need to take a look at themselves and what they do and say “in the name of religion”. For those of you that don’t know Australia is a diverse cultural nation with people from all over the world. Yes many Australians love Kangaroos, who wouldn’t, they are an amazing creature. I hope that in India you love your local animals too. Do we worship them?…well not in the stupid way this comment and many like it is inferring. Grow up world, cricket is a game, life is real, respect thy neighbours.
To AADIL: Your comments “Well and good Sri Lanka, India & Pakistan have produced many cricketers who have reached many milestones where Australians just can only come close to them but they cannot reach them.” Sorry mate you didn’t have BRADMAN, the undisputed best ever cricketer. People grow up Australia won and deserved too, we also have a rich cricketing history.
FINAL WORD: Make your comments but stick to the game and remember it is a game……..Kevin “REASON: AUSTRALIANS ARE CONVICTS. And THEY DO HAVE A RIGHT TO FIGHT FOR THAT TITLE. SOME THING TO REMEMBER: It is better to accept the defeat with dignity rather than winning a piece of metal without dignity.” Kevin this is sad and you need to grow up. Australia won with dignity it seems some people just can’t lose with dignity. We have had years of losing with dignity in the 70/80’s to the mighty West Indies. It is a game people and yes Australia has a history of convict settlement, but so what, we have evolved into a rich diverse nation with people from all over the world which includes many Sri Lankans and Indians etc. So when you sledge Australians on the whole you are sledging people from all over the world. This whole national pride thing is fine to a degree but don’t prove your ignorance by using a game to promote your pathetic ill informed views on other people in the world. This is more important than any game of cricket, this is what is wrong with the world today, people just can’t enjoy something for what it is and have to attack people for all the wrong reasons.
LikeLike
Will the ICC do something about this??? What happens if all teams start improvising in many ways??? If this is legal then I suppose the next time someone throws the ball that too should be legal right??? The end point is the ICC has lost its way in the sport and is doing nothing to get it back on track. Due to match fixing and issues such as the squash ball the interest in cricket is dwindling I guess soon it will be like a WWF wrestling match and we all have the ICC and Malcolm Speed to thank for that.
Well done mates at the ICC!!!
LikeLike
Howie grow up. This thread is getting sad, it (the squash ball) was used as part of his batting glove. He simply used it to remind himself to grip the bat correctly, but even in this regard it is more about just retoring his belief, a physiological advantage if anything. The ICC won’t ban it because they are aware of the FULL rules not just one or two quoted out of context. Further they also know the importance of the “spirit of the legislation” If you start to ban things people carry that don’t give them anything but a physiological advantage then you have to ban Steve WAUGH’s red hanky. Hmmm that would take all the fun out of the game….it is the little quirky behaviours that make it fun!!!! Stop whinging for the wrong reasons just admit you are upset because your team lost.
Just enjoy the game…it is a game people nothing more.
KEEPING IT REAL
LikeLike
it looks like none of you have realised the real scientific advantage that comes with having a squash ball in your glove.
A squash ball as you all know can be compressed easily when force is exerted on it unlike a leather ball.
When glichrist pulls his bat back to strike the ball there is pressure exerted on the squash balls. and when he plays the shot there is no more pressure so the squash ball springs back to space giving gilchrist a faster bat speed that without using a squash ball.
This faster bat speed increases the chances of hitting a six or a 4.
The disadvantage of doing this is since the bat moves faster the player might lose control of his bat and this did happen once to gilchrist when his bat fell behind his wickets.
SO THAT IS THE SCIENTIFIC ADVANTAGE OF THE WHOLE THING. IT DOES GIVE AN ADVANTAGE TO THE BATSMEN.
And i guess the australians are still worrying abt murali although they did his tests in australia and australians proved that his action is legal.
If your naked eye says its not. go do a biometrics test on him again and see for sure.
Then taking it from here onwards since sri lanka came back home only on saturday i guess it will be in a few days if they make a complaint or not
LikeLike
would you people have complained if gilchirst made a duck in the final?? I doubt it. The words sour grapes come to mind.
Maybe you people should also sue Australia because they ate Weet-Bix before the final. that gave them muscle power and an unfair advantage. LOL!!
LikeLike
Lets hope in Sri Lanka’s next match with Pakistan, Jayasooriya wants to use the same advantage (using a squash ball inside glove) but seek the permission from umpires first (unlike Auseis).
Then some debate will arise where ICC can’t hide.
LikeLike
Howie:-
Improvising is now called “Advance Technology”. To curtail advancements in head protection which would never have come about had the Brits and in particular credit to Tony Greig we have “Helmets”, had they not been used in that series when Lillee and Thompson bruised and battered them many batsmen in the present era would be all cripples. The use of the white ball for OD’s is another or else night cricket another advancement thanks to Kerry Packer would not be on your TV today, better padded batting gloves have saved many a batsmen having broken joints, instump camera and strategically positioned cameras to aid the umpires are all inovative and not to be scorned at.
As other writers have indicated it is time the Sub-continent countries accepted change but not just for change, if they are for better entertainment and safety so be it.
What others round the world witness and are saying is that currently the game is being driven by “MONEY” and a few countries and here i am excluding Sri Lanka condone craft of the highest magnitude and when caught go to the extent to use the law to shield the players concerned.
Whilst this is being promoted the game will descend to skirmishes experienced in the Football arena. Question is do we who love this game sit back and tolerate it and there is no devide ethnic wise.
I must admit until the “Murali” episode the ICC seemed to be conservative not anymore “Politics” and the sub continent run that agenda.
LikeLike
Nonsense !
It is not psychological advantage.
It is mere undue advantage by relaxing the impact of the moving ball on the bat by absorbing the energy of impact on to the rubber ball and when pushing forward same energy is released giving extra push to the ball.
Just like small kids shoot them selves up on to sky by jumping on to a trampoline
With more and more energy absorbed in to squash ball it get heated and increase the bouncing effect
I believe what Sri Lanka cricket board should do is to submit an official complain to ICC
LikeLike
My final words in this context is Srilankans should learn how to be good users. Their bowlers singularly failed on the day. ICC lost its moralilty after it changed rules to validate Murali’s suspicious action – its chucking in reality.
LikeLike
My final words in this context is Srilankans should learn how to be good losers. Their bowlers singularly failed on the day. ICC lost its moralilty after it changed rules to validate Murali’s suspicious action – its chucking in reality.
LikeLike
well, all seems to be going ugly and racial in these blogs, so lemme have a say about myself before i comment.
i’m an indian, who has fanatically supported Australia right from 1985 when i ws just 6 years old. even when australia plays against my own nation, i have supported the aussies for their talent, aggression, never-say-die attitude, and the so-called arrogance with which they play a game. whereas most of the subcontinental teams and even the rest of the teams would be playing for a draw, the australians have always played for a result in every test matches which makes test cricket so interesting to watch. no country, especially the sub-continent, can hope to produce men like Michael Bevan, and Steve Waugh. i have been so enamoured by stevie, that i a volunteer in his services for the Udayan in Calcutta where i offer my services freely in treating those sick children. my most fav ODI innings is Steve’s innings of 120 against SA in 1999 WC, and then Ponting’s against India in 2003.
now to the issue at hand…
though i was very happy to see gilly knock them off like that in the final, when i learnt that a squash ball was under his gloves, i was very surprised – for one, it didn’t seem like a big help, and next, why weren’t the Sri Lankans raising a cry over the issue….?
cricket brings up raging emotions in India, and if the match had been India vs Australia, by now we would have seen the BCCI going all the way about the legality of this issue.
i was also sad that the match was marred by rain, delays, reduced overs, and a stupid umpiring decision. we must also salute Mahela for the mature way in which he handles the issue.
for all those saying the lankans are sore losers, remember this – none of them EXCEPT MOODY, said anything about the rains, or the conditions. if they had we could say they were sore over their loss. but they didn’t.
the legality of this issue is what the question is all about. it is a clear violation of the rules, gilly didn’t need these things to play what he did, he is a master batsman that can blow any attack to pieces, and the very fact that except for his pwn waving and flashing about the ball in gloves this issue would have never broken the surface, goes to say that he didn’t think it was illegal. remember, HE IS A BATSMAN WHO WALKED IN A WC S/F. such a person wouldn’t do anything he thought was circumventing the law.
on the other hand the aussies who say that this isn’t illegal are being too premature. its for the ICC to decide that.
no matter what, Australia were the best team, coming into the WC with so much weights and doubts on their shoulders, and winning every match as convincingly as they have. for all his wizardry, murali, who is of my own ethnicity, wasn’t able to get a single wicket. clearly on any day, the aussies would have prevailed.
if the SL board would have taken up the issue to the ICC, it would be only a just decision on their part, and noone can call that stupid, or being sore losers.
LikeLike
Darme,
Learn the simple facts on Physics – for every action there is an equal and opposit reaction, that is only true where there are no constraints the parallel you have used is unrestrained the higher you jump on the trampoline coupled with a greater body mass the greater the reaction. If you get Jayawardne and Fatty Ranatunga to do the trampoline you may note the difference but in this case the body weight of Ranatunga may be negated in the fact that he is and has been the most unfit player and jumping is not is forte. All things being equal MASS will make a great difference.
In the case of Gilly half a Squash ball does nothing but helps him to concentrate better on his grip there is no advantage merasurable in the theory of “equaly and opposite reaction”.
I have said enough on Murali’s action but will conclude that he possibly has more bent parts in his anatomy than his elbow.
LikeLike
The facts are that the ball in the glove is about the same as chewing gum…….a concentration aid.
If any wish to try this(ball in the glove) you will find it very difficult to do…..
The best comments here are those from cricket player…well done….some clear thinking there at least!!
And please keep the comments about cricket otherwise you show your ignorance and lack of tolerance of the races and creeds of the world.
Cricket is what can unite us……
Congratulations to Sri Lanka. You out played many other teams in the world cup to get to the final. Well done and your fans should be very proud of your efforts. On the day Australia out played you and won the cup. But that happens…..remember you beat Australia in the past and you will again.
As for the biggest tragedy of the world cup its not how badly this or that team played but the fact that a well respected coach was brutely murdered!
This is being overlooked by some fans I think.
Vale Bob Woolmer………
Long live Cricet
The
LikeLike
I read in today’s (7th May) “The Island” that the Sri Lanka Cricket is going to lodge an official complaint to the ICC regarding this squash ball issue. Matter will be taken up in an ICC meeting scheduled to June. There’s no doubt about whether Gilly had an advantage by hiding the squash ball. He admitted himself that it helped him. And the arguement that “let Sanath also use a squash ball and see” is not valid too. Cuz, Sanath doesn’t have a problem in his grip. Squash ball was an undue advantage for THE batsman who had a problem with his grip.
LikeLike
Firstly the squash ball did not aid Gilchrist in hitting the ball harder. The ball is only there to keep his hand in the correct position on the bat. It has the same effect as using an oval shaped batting handle, of having a handle fatter at the bottom than the top (normally done with extra grips).
Secondly, even if the squash ball was there to attempt to hit the ball harder it wont work. For the squach ball to help hit the ball harder it needs to return to its original shape at teh same time that the ball is being struck. The squash ball doesn’t have enough elastic intensity to do this. The squash ball will only return back to its original shape after the cricket ball has left the bat and the cricket bat becomes unstressed.
Thirdly, even if you put a different ball or object in the glove that would give some extra power, the batsmen still needs to put the original energy into the ball (in the glove) first through a more vigorous swing. Any extra bat speed that is created can only come about from the batsmen applying energy to it. The fact that there is a ball in hsi glove just delays the time at which that energy is released (further more no object is 100% elastic so will not return 100% of teh energy) so having something in your glove will act like extra padding and lose you energy.
Now scientific arguments asside many pieces of equipment are used today that aren’t listed in the rules. Chest guards, batting inners, keeping inners, boxes (cups), spikes, toe guards, etc. etc. The law needs to be interpreted within the spirit of the game, the ball is no more performance inhancing than an oval shaped handle, or a handle with 3 pieces of rubber in it as compared to 1.
Bottom line, Srilanka bowled poorly to Gilchrist, dropped him early in his innings and then failed to bat in the manner that was required.
LikeLike
To “the srilankan” (name used on thread not Sri Lankans in general) and all the other sad people who can’t except the loss to a better team,
There is NO SCIENTIFIC ADVANTAGE in the squash ball!!! Learn Physics people and then LEARN BATTING TECHNIQUE….The ball is positioned in his glove so as to help remind Gilly to push his hands into the right position. It provides a physical barrier that makes it hard to grip the bat incorrectly. The point is in this position the ball is not depressed. How do I know for sure? Unlike all you sad pots I actually play cricket and I tried a squash ball in my glove in exactly the position I saw it in Gilchrists glove. To add to the authenticity I actually bat with a hand crafted replica of the bat Gilly used in his last word cup, which is made to his specifications. My gloves are also puma gloves. The ball sits off the bat handle so does not change in it’s compression, it mearly provides a bulge that makes it arkward when you grab the bat incorrectly. In this respect it provides no force and is not illegal as you can look at it as a self modification of the glove….perfectly in the rules. When Gilly wears it, it becomes by definition an item of clothing (clothing is defined as something you wear) and in the absence of specific exclusion laws such as with the aluminium bat is legal. The ICC would never ban it as it would restrict the design of the glove which some people require tailor made ones.
But for comedy sakes I will go into your agrument on the physics of the ball since I am a scientist I enjoy this stuff. (you clearly are not). If the squash ball was used to generate any force it would be so minute that it seriously would not add any bat speed, it is the bat that hits the ball not the squash ball so any effects would have to result in an increased bat speed. The recoil pressure of a compressed squash ball pushes both ways!!! When you bounce on a trampoline the trampoline can only stretch so far before the recoil (effectively force up) overcomes your weight (the force down), it can then only recoil back towards one position. A squash ball is three dimensional not a flat FIXED trampoline….try puting one on the ground and pushing it horizontally (on the side)….it will roll and not compress….why because “nothing” (only air) is pushing it the other way. Try pushing it verically (on top of the ball), it will now decompress because the effective weight of the ground is mother earth…a bit heavy to push. If Gilly positioned the ball so as to depress it, his hand is no mother earth (in fact it weighs much less then his bat) and he will have to apply a greater force (his muscles) to keep the ball depressed, further when the ball is recoiling it will expand in BOTH directions and Gilly would have to continue to press harder to prevent it forcing his hand out of position. Anyone with any batting knowledge will know this would be bad for your batting. As I have explained I actually used a squash ball and found all it does is provide a bulge that makes it arkward to grip the bat incorrectly, perfectly legal as explained above (type of modified glove). I tried positioning it into a position where it would depress and it was horrible in this position and incompatable with gripping the bat confidently (with any good technique). The squash ball in the glove is actually quite annoying and becomes more annoying the longer you bat, I congradulate Gilly not only on his batting so well but being able to do it with that dam thing in your glove.
One last point the world is laughing at all the whingers…why…because Gilly was dropped on 31 and a number of other times as well. Some threads have argued the squash ball was working against Gilly and was trying to get him out, but Sri Lanka couldn’t catch so the squash ball said ok Gilly lets rock I’ll stop trying to get you out now…but decided to cut him short of 150….dam that squash ball. I wonder if Sri Lanka knew how to catch a ball and had taken Gilly for 31 (or any of the other chances) if the whingers would be out in force. For all those Sri Lankans who think the squash ball helped Gilly you clearly missed the other 5 one day centuries he scored against you and the 99 run out….making it effectively 6 centuries to one fifty he has scored against you….something he has not come even close to doing against other nation and indicates once you drop him on 31 and he makes 50 you guys are toast. INSTEAD OF WHINGING ABOUT THE SQUASH BALL TELL YOUR TEAM TO DO SOME FIELDING PRACTICE AND CATCH GILLY WHEN HE HITS A CATCH.
To the “Sri Lankan” who said the proof of the bat speed is when he lost his bat……omg what a joke…guess all those players who have lost their bat mid shot had a squash ball. That has happened numerous times in history of cricket and will continue to happen when batsman get sweaty and swing to hard.
To “Tony” who says “Lets hope Jayasooriya wants to use the same advantage” Yes…..lets and you will all see there is no advantage, I am sure Jayasooriya will keep smashing lollies and getting out to good bowling.
It is the little quirky behaviours that make it fun!!!! Stop whinging for the wrong reasons, just admit you are upset because your team lost.
Just enjoy the game…it is a game people nothing more.
KEEPING IT REAL
P.S I have been in but was not born in Australian, I just love the game and respect good cricket when I see it. I also respect all countries and am sick of racist whingers who use the name of the game to spread their prejudice. Remember Bob Woolmer….. some people take the game too seriously. It is sopposed to be fun so take a deep look at why you are upset, I think you are not being honest with yourselves.
LikeLike
Ask Steven
A six to start, and was Gilchrist’s squash ball legal?
Is it legal for a batsman to have a foreign object like a squash ball inside his gloves, as Adam Gilchrist apparently did in the World Cup final? asked Vijitha Herath from Germany (and several more people from Sri Lanka!)
My feeling was that it was legal, as I didn’t think you could distinguish between a squash ball – which Gilchrist admitted he used to improve his grip during his amazing innings in the World Cup final – and the inner gloves many batsmen wear, some of which have a certain amount of padding, the finger-stalls inside some gloves to protect finger-tips, or even the raw steaks people (usually wicketkeepers) were reputed to put inside their gloves to lessen the impact of the ball. But MCC are the final authority on matters to do with the Laws, so I asked their head of cricket, the former England opener John Stephenson, who confirmed: “The official view is that you are correct. It is no different to wearing inners, etc.”
LikeLike
Taken from:
http://content-aus.cricinfo.com/columns/content/current/story/293249.html
LikeLike
To Cricket Player
I too agree with you about the sceintific aspect of this issue. No way we can expect the force of a “squash” ball to help a batsman to hit the “cricket” ball hardr with a “cricket” bat.
Let’s just froget all the comments based on physics and science as bullshit. And let’s get to the point staightly. What does a “SQUASH” ball doing in a “cricket” match?. Author of this post has clearly pointed it’s illegal for cricketers to use equipment other than those permitted by law. It’s very clear that SQUASH balls are not in the list of permitted “CRICKET” equipments. So what? It’s clear that Gilly broke a rule. And by not informing the umpires about what he’s doing, he cheated as well.
Next question. Did the SQUASH ball helped Gilly?
I think we don’t need to argue on this. Just watch a replay of the press conference where Gilly himself “confess” that the squash ball helped him to solve his batting grip problem. So no arguement about that it helped Giily.
There’s no big deal to be argued here. Simply, the ICC will have to decide whether Gilchrist breached the Law 3 (6) (c) (i) of cricket law books.
Bottomline is “Gilchrist cheated”. He simply degraed what would otherwise be an “honorable” victory for the Australian. Now, it’s no more an “honorable” victory. It’s “victory by cheating”. And, we now wonder what else could these Aussies be hiding inside their clothes! (Other than those permited by the god)
LikeLike
Correction: “He simply degraded…”
LikeLike
///Just enjoy the game…it is a game people nothing more\\\
How can some one “just” enjoy the game, when Aussies are cheating on the game?. First it was underarm balling by Mr. Underarm Chapel. Then came the Alluminium bat. Then came the graphite coated bat by Mr. Ponting. Why all Aussies are behind these incidents? A proven track record of cheating
LikeLike
Hey Hey Hey Voice of Colombo,
wish you apply the same principles to Murali, his action was illegal, politics and sub-continent pressure made the ICC wilt and they amended the law not once twice to accommodate his illegal action. Ranatunga your Captain was the worst for playing the rules to his advantage in calling for a runner because he was so fat and unfit, was all this in the best spirit of the game, I say not and it is these things that have lost respect for the ICC, they are as much use as tits on a bull.
Well sulk as much as you like and for as long as you like it’s not going to bring the World Cup to Colombo.
Learn from the Aussies how best to be professional, your turn will come when you have reached that or a better status that is equavalent to be a dominating force not just in one department of the game but in all 3.
Good Luck will see you for the 2 Tests and OD games towards the end of the year, you can shout me a beer for every 6 Gilly gets and I will shout you a squash ball in return.
LikeLike
Voice in columbo,
Glad to hear someone speaks a little sense regarding the beat up “scientific benefits” We all know this is crap and glad someone has the decency to say that. On your other point read my reply in a little more detail. I am well versed in legal interpretation and can tell you that any rule or law needs to meet the criteria of the spirit of the legislation. In this regard once you accept there is no scientific benefit then it is not within the spirit of the legislation to ban it. To do so would be akin to saying to Steve Waugh you can’t have your red hanky….ask him if it helped his batting and he will tell you yes also. The aluminum bat had a definite advantage so they banned it, the graphite coated bat in theory had a potential advantage so they banned that. The aluminium bat occurred after they exploded in baseball. For some time baseball just used wooden bats also, baseball decided to keep them, cricket decided to keep the traditional wood. If you are going to keep wood then they had to ban the aluminium because it was defintely a better performing bat (depending a bit on your batting style). It can be looked at as someone trying to test the evolution of the game, baseball evolved with it, cricket decided not too. Neither were against the rules of the time so neither was cheating, both were reviewed as not within the interests of the game to continue to allow so both were ban. You can’t say either one was cheating or all the aluminium batters in baseball today are cheating….no they both played within the rules and spirit of the game as it stood at the time, as do the current uses of aluminium baseball bats. As for the underarm well I do not think that was within the spirit of the game either but it was within the rules and so was legit. In fact cricket said nothing about having to bowl overarm and if you understood some history of cricket you would know that…Chappell obviously did being in a family with a rich history of cricket. In most situations bowling underarm would mean you would go for a lot more runs, usually this meant it just wasn’t done. Chappell took advantage of a situation where strangely underarm guaranteed no six could be hit as required. Definitely in my books not a desirable choice but even you have to admit it is not cheating as it was clearly allowed in the rules, hence why the result still stands in the history books.
But on the squash ball since you are not reading what I said before it is legit and allowed under the cricket laws. It acts as a padding to assist Gilly to form the right grip…..what do you think the purpose of a glove is? You really need to wake up and smell the roses… A cricket glove has two purposes:
(1) Protection
(2) To assist you with your grip on the bat
The design of the glove includes many features that assist with the grip, such as some having breaks in the padding to assist flexibility. If Gilly finds a squash ball in the glove helps him position his hand around the bat then he has simply found a way of modifying his glove to suit his need and grip and is definitely NOT illegal. Many players worldwide use modified gloves for this reason.
And just if you can’t get over the squash ball thing, well when Gilly cuts it in half (he only used half a squash ball) it is no longer a squash “ball”. In fact it really just becomes a half sphere of rubber. Rubber itself is used extensively in the manufacturing of many cricketing gloves worldwide, so it can hardly be banned. Would you then argue to ban all rubber from cricketing gloves…… if so as a cricket player I hope you never make it into any area involved in cricket administration and regulation.
Hope this helps,
KEEPING IT REAL
LikeLike
I belive there is nothing we can Decide by Debating this Matter I belive this Matter should be Proven with Scientific Evidence, all that Matter is If any player use an equipment to exelarate the Batting according to the Law of Cricket the Innings is UnFair As a Cricketer I tested with the Squash Ball this Trick is really working the Shots that we are playing is more Powerful and Easyier for Me, I belive this Matter should examine with ICC with the Scientific Evidence
LikeLike
I don’t want to be carried away with this argument, because I know for sure it won’t take either of us a better stance. You’ll bear your opinion and put supporting factors to back it up, and so do I. It will go on like that for ever. So, the wisest thing to do is, to wait and see what the ICC say about this. If they say SQAUSH balls (or half of it) are allowed in CRICKET, I will definitely buy your argument.
Just one final note
///A cricket glove has two purposes:
(1) Protection
(2) To assist you with your grip on the bat\\\
Obviously the Gilly had a problem with the second one. So what could have he done? Either to improve his grip by testing different hand positioning (Tendulkar did it, Sanath did it in the past) or else opt for a different pair of gloves which could help him. Rather what he did was to opt for some “foreign objects” (Foreign to cricket) inside his gloves. And it’s rightfully questionable.
I’m very much thankful to the author of churumuri.wordpress.com for bringing this to the notice of the world. This thread is now a widely spoken topic around the world, and kudos on a job well done! We shouldn’t let some one just simply escape after doing such an unlawful act. Either the law has to be revised, or the person has to be punished. Let the ICC decide.
LikeLike
YOU ALL HAVE MISSED THE POINT
It’s not whether SL won or lost that matters but the fact that LAWS have been broken clearly and action needs be taken lest others follow suit and the whole game of cricket will be brought to disrepute by a bunch of cheats and crooks who will stoop so low to win a game.
Well with ex-convicts having pioneered the trend one can only expect the worst….
LikeLike
TO RANGA…..
PLEASE NOTE THAT MURALI HAS BEEN CLEARED NOT ONCE BUT THRICE BY THE ICC BOWLING PANEL.
HIS IS A NATURAL BIRTH DISORDER AND HE IS BASICALLY DIFFERENTLY ABLED IN A MINOR WAY.WHICH HAS ASSISTED HIS BOWLING.
HE HAS NOT BROKEN AND REPAIRED HIS ARM WITH THE ANGLE TO SUIT HIS BOWLING .
SO RANGA PLS. CHK BEFORE YOU COMMENT.
LikeLike
VOICE IN COLOMBO YOU ARE RIGHT LET THE ICC RULE.
I TRUST THEY WILL NOT GET CARRIED AWAY BECAUSE UNLIKE DISGRUNTLED SRI LANKAN FANS OR AUSSIE HATERS THEY ARE NEUTRAL. I MYSELF DON’T LIKE SOME ASPECTS OF AUSSIE CRICKET BUT I WON’T LOOK FOR EXCUSES TO BRANDISH THIS IN A STUPID WAY LIKE THIS THREAD. I DO HOWEVER RESPECT THEIR CRICKETING ABILITY. YOUR POINT ON “FOREIGN OBJECT” IS WRONG AS I HAVE EXPLAINED AND IT IS GETTING A BIT BORING REPEATING BUT HERE GOES……HALF A SQUASH BALL IS JUST RUBBER, RUBBER IS AN INTEGRAL PART OF MANY CRICKET GLOVES AND YOU CAN NOT BAN IT FROM INSIDE THE GLOVE. IF GILLY HAS IT STICHED INTO HIS GLOVE LINING IT JUST BECOMES PART OF HIS GLOVE. UNLIKE TENDULKAR WHO IS A LEGEND BUT FRANKLY GETS HIS OWN WAY ON ANYTHING AND COULD CLICK HIS FINGERS AND SOME GLOVE MANUFACTURER WOULD SPIT OUT A MILLION GLOVES TO HIS EXACT SPECS MOST OTHER CRICKETERS INCLUDING GILLY DO THINGS A LITTLE BIT CRUDER AT TIMES. THIS JUST PROVES IT AND IT IS JUST SIMPLE THINKING AND QUICK WAY TO ACHIEVE A GLOVE TO ACHIEVE WHAT HE NEEDS WITHOUT HASSLING SOME MANUFACTURER.
SO GILLY WILL “ESCAPE” AS HE HAS DONE NOTHING WRONG OR UNLAWFUL…LOOK AT THE REAL REASON YOU ARE UPSET…DO SOME SOULD SEARCHING….IT IS A GAME AND YOU HAVE LOST THE FUN AND PERSPECTIVE.
KEEPING IT REAL
LikeLike
No Manilal you racist fool,
You have missed the point
HALF A SQUASH BALL IS JUST RUBBER….Rubber is integral part of many cricket gloves. Like Columbo said aparently supporting your argument Tendulkar got his own modified set of gloves made up. Well not all cricket players can click their fingers like the legendary Tendulkar and have every glove manufacturer suddenly producing millions of taylor made gloves. Sure Gilly uses Puma but he has come from a normal family background and probably appreciates the backyard fixes then someone fed with a silver spoon. Tendulkar is a legend but the way he is adored he gets anything. Gilly approaches things a bit more simply and shoves a piece of rubber in his glove….he could have asked a glove manufacturer to stitch it in there and it just becomes part of the glove. Like I said MANY gloves use rubber as part of their makeup. The gloves role is not just protection but also to assist your grip. Gilly has just used a piece of rubber to do a homemade job of improving his gloves performance. This is totally legal or are you saying Sachin has cheated in all his innings when he used his taylor made gloves…….HOW DARE YOU CALL THE LEGENDARY SACHIN A CHEAT!!!!! HE IS A LEGEND.
I also PUT IT TO YOU IT WOULD BE ILLEGAL TO BAN THE GLOVE MODIFICATION IF IT HELPS GILLY’S GRIP THE BAT. DID YOU NOTE HOW GILLY LOST HIS BAT DURING THE MATCH. THIS HAPPENS WHEN A BATSMAN GETS A BIT SWEATY AND HIS GRIP IS NOT IDEAL. SO CLEARLY THE SQUASH BALL WASN’T QUITE DOING IT’S JOB. WHEN I TRIED BATTING WITH A SQUASH BALL I FOUND IF IT ROLLS DOWN TO YOUR PALM IT ACTUALLY GETS IN THE ROAD. SO GILLY NEEDS TO STITCH IT INTO POSITION. IF IT IS IN THE CORRECT POSITION IT HELPS HIS GRIP THEN THIS SHOULD ACTUALLY REDUCE THE CHANCE OF HIM LOSING CONTROL OF THE BAT WHEN HE GETS SWEATY (HAPPENS WHEN YOU SCORE OVER 100!) IT WOULD BE AGAINST INTERNATIONAL WORKPLACE HEALTH AND SAFETY TO BAN HIM FROM IMPROVING HIS GRIP AFTER ALL THEY ARE ALL WORKING SO UNDER THE ACT THE CRICKET FIELD BECOMES HIS WORKPLACE. WHEN YOU LOSE A BAT THIS INCREASES DANGER TO ALL CLOSE IN FIELDERS SO UNDER THE ACT GILLY HAS TO WEAR HIS MODIFIED GLOVES FOR THE SAFETY OF THE CLOSE IN FIELDERS (I have played in a game where a player got hit by a bat coming loose from a batsman…very nasty…he ended up in hospital with a broken jaw) ……..:-)
Just treating this debate with the respect it deserves.
KEEPING IT REAL
LikeLike
How legal was Adam Gilchrist’s “hidden ball”?
Maybe the title should be: “how legal is this accusation”??? LOL!!
LikeLike
The debate on the subcontinent about the legality of Gilchrist’s innings because he had a rubber ball in his glove is treated largely in Australia as a joke. In these kind of circumstances, it is hard for phrases like “sore losers” and “sour grapes” not to leap gleefully to the front of one’s mind.
LikeLike
It seems to me that the cricket’s ruling body needs either to bring in new rules, or clarify the existing ones, with regard to precisly what accessories a batsman is allowed to use.
Personally, I do not think batsmen should be allowed to use any artificial means to enhance, or overcome a technical flaw (as was the case with Gilchrist by his own admission) in their batting. The essence of the cricket is the skill of the bowler against the skill of the batsman devoid of any artifical aids; part of this is the exploitation by the bowler of any technical defects in the batsman.
If batsmen are allowed to use artificial aids then where will it all end? I’m sure there are plenty of clever boffins out there who can think of even cleverer mechanisms to enhance a batsmen’s skill. In the same way that tennis had to bring in new rules to stop the use of ever more powerful rackets then cricket must face up to this challenge. Glichrist’s amazing innings should be seen as a wake up call to the cricketing authorities and they should take action before the next world cup!
Also, I think it would have been very interesting had Jaywadene challenged the use of the squash ball during the match itself, something which I believe he would have been perfectly entitled to do. Would that have been considered to be within the spirit of the game and fair play by the average Australian fan? Me thinks not. I’m sure the ex generalissimo Ranatunga would have had something to say on the matter. Which umpire or referee would have been brave (or stupid if you want to be cynical) enough to rule the use of the squash ball illegal. Daryl Hare, that bastion of fair play, perhaps? Alas we shall never know as the umpires and referee were as ignorant as the rest of us what Gilchrist had in his glove until he chose to share his secret with all and sundry.
I would also add the thing that makes Aussies such great sportsmen, their ability and willingness to push the boundaries in all aspects, can, on occasions, detract from their achievements. One only has to remember the match where Greig Chappel bowled underarm – that was legal, but regarded as less than sportsmanlike by most cricket lovers. I fear that this latest Australian escapade will be viewed in the same vein by many across the world.
Moreover, if Muralitharan’s action can continue be regarded as illegal by many Australian fans (including the Prime Minister John Howard), even though independent scientific tests have confirmed otherwise, then surely the use of the squash ball is equally as dubious, if not more so. In short why should non-Australian fans meekly accept that no rules were broken by Gilchrist when a large swathe of Australian fans appear not to do so with respect to Muralithran?
One final point: Australia’s fans themselves are not above what they dismissively accuse all others of doing – whinging. One only has to cite the Australian outcry during the bodyline series in which Jardine, the English captain, employed tactics, though perfectly legal and within the laws, were considered by Australians to be akin to cheating. The fact that nothing illegal had been done did not prevent the Australian psyche, with some justification according to the norms of the time, to feel much aggrieved.
And more recently, there was the case of the Pakistani bowlers and ‘reverse swing’. In the early 90’s I seem to remember that most of the occidental sporting media, including their Antipodean (i.e. Australian) bretheren, worked themselves into a sanctimonious and self righteous frenzy whereby they concluded those dastardly fellows from the East were up to there old tricks of cheating, for how else could they get the ball to ‘reverse swing’ at pace. But we are now all told what fine exponents of this art messers Tait et al are now that the Australian team has someone capable of doing this. Unfortunately, the same myopic attitude extends to the Australian view of Muralitharan: there is a simple denial of the fact that there may be a spinner of equal stature to Shane Warne. Where is the Australian fan’s admiration for his skill?
It is also noticeable that the same media and punditry that decried ‘reverse swing’ when it first came to the fore is deafeningly silent on the wrongs and rights of what Gilchrist did. Why is this? Would they have been so sanguine about it had a member of another team done this?
Could it be that when a team other than Australia develop a new mode of play, or have players who are pushing the envelope in new direction, they are treated by Australian fans with suspicion and hostility? Yet contrast this with what is being demanded of non-Australian supporters with regard to Gilchrist’s use of the squash ball; blind admiration for the ingenuity and skill in having the gumption and audacity to take a training aid onto the field of play. Funny, I was bought up in the belief that training aids were left on the training ground, not taken onto the field of battle.
No doubt many Australian, and perhaps some non-Australian, fans will conveniently dismiss these questions about use of the squash ball as whinging by a bunch envious anti-Australian losers, but this would miss the point. The questions are important, legitimate and not without basis and as such need to be taken seriously by cricket’s governing body.
Incidentally, I am not a Sri Lankan, but a long suffering supporter of that rag tag bunch of bloated, overpaid under achievers known as the Indian team. Moreover my child hood cricket heroes were Australian, Lillee and Thomson, and I have always been a fan of the positive attacking cricket that Australian teams play, i.e. I am not a rabid, foaming at the mouth anti-Australian. That is why it is more the pity I have felt compelled to pen this little polemic, but I feel there is an important cricketing issue at stake here. One must call it as one sees it.
LikeLike
Manilal,
You have the thickest bloody head after a coconut,
Yes Murali was cleared 3 times by the ICC and on each occasion they changed the BLOODY RULE to accommodate the pressure from your country and rather than saying “on your damn byke ride away into the hills” the ICC wilted and compromised, that is the FACT.
You admit his arm defect assists his ability to spin the ball to a greater extent than a conventional straight arm bowler, poor bugger, may be he should have been playing hockey instead.
The ICC is as much use as tits on a bull, it should be reconstituted with people who have “BALLS” and can adjudicate with fairness irrespective of whether the country is in the northern hemisphere or the southern and throw discenting countries out and if that means losing the game from a Colonial Game so be it. Cricket is not and never will be a game that is played world wide. One solution might be that the Sub-Continent have their own institution and play amoungst themselves so they can change the rules on a match by match basis. England, SA, NZ, AUS & WI will only be 2 content to remain as a unit.
LikeLike
To add to my last statement of Countries such as Netherlands, ZIM, Canada, Scotland, Ireland and some African Countries I’m sure will remain with the “Strength”, India, Pakistan, Lanka and Zim can have their own
LikeLike
The rules regarding chucking were not changed to accomodate Murali, in fact his bowling action has one of the lowest amounts of straightening of any bowler in world cricket (about 5%). The rules were changed because scientific study showed that bowlers who appeared to have “classical” actions, including Glenn McGrath, in fact were straightening their arms up to 10% or even more. After the research that has been done, and the information we now have, it is just plain ignorant to say Murali is a chucker.
LikeLike
To address a few points in the original post:
* The visibility (a term you deceptively emboldened) of the squash ball is irrelevant; the question of visibility applies to forearm guards. Gilchrist’s squash ball is not a forearm guard.
* In order to obtain any mechanical advantage, the ball must move as one with Gilchrist’s glove. Therefore, the ball can be considered part of his glove. Had he worn inner gloves with rubber reinforcement there would be no reason to consider his gloves illegal. Although the ball was not fixed to his glove, it was functionally part of the glove.
* There is no specification in the Laws of Cricket governing the composition of a batsman’s gloves. There are laws governing the composition of a bat (Law 6) and governing the use bandages on a bowler’s hand (albeit indirectly – Law 42, in relation to changing the condition of the ball).
* Law 3, which you quote, states that the umpires _shall satisfy themselves_ as to the legality of the equipment used by the players. Therefore, the onus is on the _umpires_ to inspect and then rule on the legality of any questionable equipment, _during the match_. Gilchrist was out there for quite a while and made no effort to hide his use of the squash ball in his glove, indeed, waving it prominently (which is why we’re talking about it now). No umpire, nor the match referee, batted an eyelid.
Perhaps the Laws of Cricket as they are now are not sufficiently detailed to deal with situations like this. Maybe they need to be reviewed.
However, Gilchrist’s use of the squash ball in the glove was legal according to the Laws used when the match was played and was similar to previous actions deemed legal under the same Laws such as the use of steak or other extra padding inside wicket-keepers’ gloves, or reinforcing batsman’s pads with newspaper worn between the leg and inside of the pad.
LikeLike
OK Sri Lankans (and other whingers), if you want to cry about the rain and the result using the D/L system in the final, why don’t we do what they do in other sports (eg yachting). How about we call the final a draw, and go to a count back…
Let’s see, in the series, Australia UNDEFEATED.
Head to head (Super 8 stage): April 16, 2007, Australia easily defeated Sri Lanka by seven wickets.
Hmmm, pretty clear. Australia win on countback BY A MILE.
LikeLike
The question I am raising is if Adam Gilchrist thought it was legal to use the squash ball to help in his batting why did he wait till the Final match to do this. Why didn’t he use it in the previous matches I wonder? I leave it to the bloggers to decide???
LikeLike
What a great innings was that dear Gilly played.He is not a cheater.He is the most truthfull player we’ve ever seen.Just enjoy the game.Remember that sqash ball had no significance in Gilly’s batting.Gilly, go ahead.
LikeLike
I can see now this thread is becoming more disgusting and moving off from the topic, with many racist comments by some Aussie fans. As usual, Aussie fans drags in the color of the skin to “solve” problems. Just like they shout out at black players palying in Australian venues. Your resitance towards Murali is nothing else than a simple jealuosy towars Murali, because he is the greatest spin bowler in the history of cricket; not Warney.
Why should ICC be afraid of Sri Lanka and change the rule books? Sri Lanka is just a tiny Island playing cricket, and have the least bargaining power at ICC compared to Australia, England and South Africa. So it’s rubbish to say that ICC change the rules “to accommodate the pressure from OUR country”. If Murali was wrong, ICC would have ban him. If Sri Lanka oppose to that, they have all the rights to ban entire Sri Lanka from cricket. Think about the composition of ICC. It’s dominated by officials from Australia and England. There’s no such “Sri Lankan power” inside ICC. The simple truth is there’s nothing wrong in Murali’s action, and ICC cleared him. Aussies tried their best to end his career, to make way for Warney to be the greatest spinner. But they failed. Now they complaint.
So please don’t drag irrelavant arguements into this. Murali’s action is now cleared, and he has been named as Wisden player of the year too. What do you say? Wisden is bribed by Sri Lankans? Rubbish!
The issue is, whether or not it’s legal what Gilly did. Now, since the matter is gone to the ICC level, let’s just wait and see what they have to say. And, as some one else said earlier, this is nothing about winning and losing. It’s all about what’s right and wrong. There’s no question about Australia’s victory in 2007 world cup. They deserve the cup, the way they played in the tournament. But, with this incident the value of their victory has been degraded a lot. A LOT.
LikeLike
What an absolutely purile, infantile debate. I guess I thought that Generally Sri Lankan cricket fans were a cut above the rest of the subcontinent since their Captain maintained such grace and diginity in defeat.
Now, after applauding the ICC for changing the rules to suit their most successful bowler, they believe a squash ball was the only reason for Australia’s win.
Have a good hard look at yourselves those that claim that having a squash ball in your glove is contrary to the spirit of cricket. Making the ICC change the rules to accomodate an illegal bowling action is against the spirit of Cricket, but like the majority of Australians we accepted the decision of the umpire.Two words….SOUR GRAPES.
LikeLike
P.s. To voice in Columbo
“A proven track record in cheating”? That’s rich coming from the subcontinent which is famous for it’s bookies and corrupting the world of cricket with match fixing and bribes.
It took an Australian to show your team how to win again. Why don’t you shut your mouth and just get on with cleaning up the mess in your part of the cricketing world.
LikeLike
Voice in Colombo
try not to sound to much like a spoilt child. “Murali is the greatest spin-bowler int he history ofcricket” nah, nah, nah….I notice people from the sub-continent are always quick to call whites rascist, but of course, they never are, themselves. And it shows who little you know about the ICC if you haven’t realised that its India that have the ICC under their thumb these days, not the whites.
It seems like from the sub-continent’s point of view, Gilchrist’s squash ball is cheating, but taking drugs apparently, is fine.
LikeLike
sammy: How do you justify this claim that the rules on chucking were changed to suit Murali? The facts are that the rules were reviewed after the 2004 Champions Trophy, when a thourough analysis of video footage showed that almost every bowler was straightening their arm more than the allowed limit. So, the limit was raised to 15 degrees, to accomodate the many classical style bowlers who it turned out were actually technically chucking… this didn’t even affect Murali, whose 5% flex is in fact one of the lowest, and therefore “most legal” around. What you are saying is just blatant lies, or ignorance of the facts.
For the record I also believe Gilchrist’s use of the squash ball was perfectly legal, and should not be allowed to take away from his or Australia’s great performance.
LikeLike
The bargaining power in the ICC is basically split between the (former) British Commonwealth countries and Subcontinental countries, with the West Indies and South Africa being the swing votes. Of late, those swing votes have gone with the Subcontinent because of the increased capacity for profit there. That’s why the next World Cup will be there, despite their submission being late, despite them hosting a World Cup as recently as 1996. I’m sure it’ll be a great World Cup, but just to show you, SL are not without bargaining power so long as they vote with the other Subcontinental boards.
If everyone could stick to the facts of this incident, and not which bowlers throw, and which countries cheat all the time, and which countries are full of racists, we might be able to have a decent discussion.
LikeLike
First of all congradulations for Australia for winning the world cup.
The issue that, weather using a squash ball inside your glove leagel has gone way off the topic here. Here is my humble opinion.
1. Is using a squash ball inside your glove legal?
No. And Gilly knew this. If not why did he waited until the final match? After all he has used this before in local games and it had proven successfull.
2. Did Sri Lanka loose because of this?
You will never know. Both Australia and Sri Lanka are wonderfull teams and you can have arguments for both sides. It is true that Australia have a very very strong batting lineup, but it is also true that only Gilly was successfull against Sri Lankan bowlers (Hayden 38 off 55 and Ponting 37 off 42).
3. Should we have a re-match?
Absolutely not. Whatever it was, it is over now and there is no point in having a re-match. It would not be a world cup final. It is true that Sri Lanka was really unlucky that day (loosing the toss; only having 38 overs; having rain interruption and bad light when batting; droped catches; bad lbw dissisions ect.), but that is bad luck.
4. What should be done?
Declare that Gilly’s innings was illegal and fine him. Take neccessary action to prevent such things from happening in future.
It was very dissapointing from Gilly. Such a gentleman among the Aussies- always ‘walking’.
LikeLike
Nuwan,
Where does it say that using a squash ball inside your glove is illegal?
Perhaps he wasn’t yet comfortable enough with it to risk using it in an international game? Perhaps he thought “Why not try it? I’m not making runs anyway”?
LikeLike
The man walks when he is out. To say he behaved like a drug cheat is disrespectful.
LikeLike
Update:
http://inhome.rediff.com/cricket/2007/may/08lanka.htm
—snip—
“We don’t think he did anything illegal but we question whether it was unethical or within the spirit of the game,” cricket board secretary Kangadaran Mathivanan told Reuters.
“We plan to raise the issue with the ICC in June so that there can be a discussion as to whether using an object inside the glove should be permitted or not,” he added.
—snip—
I agree with Mr. Mathivanan. What Gilchrist did was legal, but obviously the Laws are not clear, so the issue needs to be raised.
LikeLike
Dear Ben
If you don’t know what you’re talking about you should just shut your mouth. He was tested in Perth and in the words our nation’s leader “he’s a CHUCKER!!!!”
LikeLike
To whom it may concern,
By going through this article I got to know that there are so many people who are not aware about cricket. POOR PEOPLE!!! This is CRICKET not SQUASH. In every sport, it is allowed to play only one sport, not many!
This is like playing Karate within the Boxing ring. You should read this.
http://www.sundaytimes.lk/070506/Sports/sp204.html
LikeLike
No you should read this…half a squash ball is not a squash ball…you ever played squash with half a squash ball…that is what Gilly used. When he cuts it in half it is just a bit of rubber….perfectly legal…see entry below.
LikeLike
Is it really a half of the squash ball? I don’t think so. Are you sure?
LikeLike
Yes it was half a squash ball as reported by Gilly and numerous reports eg.
“Gilchrist said he inserted half a squash ball in his left (bottom hand) glove on the advice of his Western Australia batting coach Bob Meuleman”
What is half a squash ball? When you cut it in half it is no longer a squash ball that is for sure…..they don’t play squash with half a ball and by definition it is no longer a “ball” so get over the squash ball thing……HALF A SQUASH BALL IS JUST A PIECE OF RUBBER.
Further half a squash ball loses its ability to be compressed at pressure as the inside is now open it can’t act like a full squash ball where the air inside can be pressurized. So is again JUST A PIECE OF RUBBER
Further rubber is employed in its capacity to absorb shock in the design of many cricketing GLOVES. Do you have to declare the rubber to umpires that is in your gloves….no and no one ever has. When Gilly inserted half a squash ball which as I have explained when cut in half is just a piece of rubber, he simply put a piece of rubber into his glove to allow the glove to best suit the needs of his anatomy. With the rubber in the correct place this allows him to grip the bat correctly. This is the major purpose of the glove other than protection. Have a look at the design of batting gloves. They include many features such as cuts in the padding to allow flexibility. This flexibility assists in a better grip. So as explained the overall design of the glove is to achieve protection and assist in achieving a proper grip. As explained materials used to do this include rubber. So Gilly has found a simple way of modifying his glove to better achieve its purpose for him. He does not have to declare the rubber he used in the same way any other batsman does not have to declare the rubber used in their gloves.
LikeLike
ya u r right ranga , not only muralitharan , but also lasith Maling Who throws the ball like any thing , malingas bowling is purely a throw ball . i think the squash ball would’nt make much Difference , if gilly had’nt performed, it would have been done by Symonds, Clarke , Hussey , watson Etc ,
LikeLike
steve waugh’s red hankerchief was not part cricket equipment, why didnt anyone complain???
my underwear, head band, wrist band are not part of cricket equipments. but i can use them whenever I play cricket. it is non of your business if use them. THe same go for the squash ball. I can put whatever I like inside the glove, it is personal choice and non of your business. LOL.
how much force can be generated by half a compressed rubber ball. HA HA HA. you people dont know anything about physics. enough to clear the ball over the boundary, is it??? THen every teams can have power hitter like Gilchrist then?? HA HA HA.
GIlchrist is one of the cleanest hittter in the history of the game. it is not the first time he has smashed quick century, what is the big deal??
it was gilchrist’s ability that scored the century, not that bloody rubber ball.
I cant believe you sri lankans even come up with this excuse. HA HA HA.
you cant bear losing, that is all.
LikeLike
so what if the ball helps to control the bat better?? Gilchrist is within his right to put whatever he like inside his glove. it is non of you people’s business.
LikeLike
Monster you crack me up. I am with ya mate but you take the in ya face approach :-)……
These guys are upset….fair enough to a degree they lost to a better team and are finding it tough. Rubbing it in their face just keeps them coming back to but but the rubber ball.
People read my lengthy reply on the rubber HALF “ball” that was actually used. It is allowed under the rules of cricket. Rubber is used in the bat handle and in the gloves themselves…all to improve performance of the said item and all legal. Gilly’s piece of rubber would not have improved the degree of power but would have helped his grip for sure….this is the purpose of the glove. The glove has rubber in it and you do not have to declare this to the umpire….NO one ever has.
Hope this helps….have a beer…best fix for the blues.
LikeLike
Voice in Colombo:
When the underarm delivery was bowled, it was legal, rules changed afterwards. Dennis Lillee’s aluminium bat was legal at the time, rules changed afterwards
Hence, no cheating involved.
Bit like Murali’s action, rules changed afterwards but to allow, not to disallow his bowling action.
Get your facts right you plank!
LikeLike
THis is why you people keep whinging
http://content-aus.cricinfo.com/ci/content/image/293145.html
would you morons complain if sri lanka won the world cup?? LOL
LikeLike
This is absolutely ridiculous! To all the ppl blaming Gilly for being ‘unethical’ — have u even tried batting with a squash ball inside ur glove???? It makes it more difficult! Also, it is supposed to work the same way as inner padding and inner gloves do for every batsmen — so if Gilly’s inns is considered unlawful or unethical, so too is every other batsman’s innings!!!
It’s just sore losers crying out there because the Aussies have won all their last 3 WCs against teams from the subcontinent — and they have thrashed all of them! Bottomline is…squash ball or not, Aus would have won!
Finally, to those of you from the subcontinent blaming Aussies for being racist, I actually noticed you guys started the ‘racist’ comments first by calling them a nation of convict etc. Give it a rest guys!
If the Lankan players don’t have a problem WHY THE HELL SHOULD YOU???
LikeLike
ICC are never going to say it was illegal. This from Cricinfo:
Q:Is it legal for a batsman to have a foreign object like a squash ball inside his gloves, as Adam Gilchrist apparently did in the World Cup final? asked Vijitha Herath from Germany (and several more people from Sri Lanka!)
A:My feeling was that it was legal, as I didn’t think you could distinguish between a squash ball – which Gilchrist admitted he used to improve his grip during his amazing innings in the World Cup final – and the inner gloves many batsmen wear, some of which have a certain amount of padding, the finger-stalls inside some gloves to protect finger-tips, or even the raw steaks people (usually wicketkeepers) were reputed to put inside their gloves to lessen the impact of the ball. But MCC are the final authority on matters to do with the Laws, so I asked their head of cricket, the former England opener John Stephenson, who confirmed: “The official view is that you are correct. It is no different to wearing inners, etc.”
’nuff said, roll on 2011
LikeLike
//
Paramjit Singh Says:
One final point: Australia’s fans themselves are not above what they dismissively accuse all others of doing – whinging. One only has to cite the Australian outcry during the bodyline series in which Jardine, the English captain, employed tactics, though perfectly legal and within the laws, were considered by Australians to be akin to cheating. The fact that nothing illegal had been done did not prevent the Australian psyche, with some justification according to the norms of the time, to feel much aggrieved.
//
No, Australia didn’t claim that Jardine cheated, but (rightly) complained that the tactics were not in the spirit of the game. You see, sometime before Sri Lanka played test cricket, cricket was played without without helmets and guards. The Australian team was, much like now, unbeatable. It took a coward like Jardine to figure if you can’t get-em-out then knock-em-out. But hey, Jardine was born on the sub-continent, and he obviously got the idea from somewhere.
The rubber wouldn’t have even sat between bat and hand. The half-squash ball was used to force Gilchrist into a grip that restricted the use of his bottom hand — that’s the benefit Gilchrist got. The handle is actually pushed to a different part of the hand and provides no other benefit — no talk of physics required guys!
The reasons Australia won include:
1) Winning a very important toss, but how often do we see games decided by the toss
2) The inability of Vaas to swing the ball
3) The poor form of Fernando leading into the match — and Gilchrist and Hayden were never going to let him settle
4) Too many runs on the board for Murali to have any real effect
If any of these things had of gone the other way, the result could have been different. I don’t necessarily think Sri Lanka was the stronger team, but certainly they can beat Australia on their day.
I’ve seen Sri Lankan supporters at games and, while sometime just annoying, I think they’re among the most passionate and educated supporters. The Sri Lankan team were so gracious in defeat. Sri Lankan posters to this blog on the other hand — build a bridge, get over it!
LikeLike
I think its illegal and unsporty and the way he batted that day very strange, I think He was after steroids
LikeLike
well,well,cricket player you seem to have two nationalties.one of your other blogs you have stated that you were BORN AND BRED IN ENGLAND.now here you have stated that “As an Australian I’m”.so wich is your true nationalty.and you have mentioned so much about growing up I’m guessing that you’re at least 100 years old.
LikeLike
Isn’t it amazing that so many Sri Lankans have taken umbridge over such a trival matter, when Sri Lanka won the world Cup some years back I cannot recall any whinging from the Aussies, it smarted us but we took it on the chin and moved on.
If half these protestors were to be more loyal to their country then enlist in your army and fight your enemy that is within.
2 Light aircrafts, what I call at best, a PONCY AIRFORCE has got your nation start struck and no response.
To ALL SRI LANKANS ENLIST AND HELP YOUR COUNTRY IN NEED
LikeLike
I have to say that the comparison of the semi squash ball to the use of the inner gloves is, as we say in the UK, a load of old bollocks. Inner gloves are uniformly thin and to my knowledge do not effect the posture of the hand in relation to the bat handle.
Now compare this to the use of a half a squash ball which is a hemisphere. If this hemispherical object is inserted into the bottom hand it will naturally effect the posture of the hand relative to the bat handle as it creates a flexible bulge in the palm of the hand. Presumably the resulting bulge ensures that the bottom hand does not grip the the handle too tightly: it ensures that the orientation of the bottom hand in relation to the handle is maintained throughout the stroke, thereby allowing the blade of the bat to meet the ball at more or less the ideal angle. This is the effect that Gilchrist was seeking (and who can blame him?).
Without the squash ball, as Gilchrist himself has said, there was a tendency for too much bottom hand, or as Meuleman, his coach, has said it compelled Gilchrist to hold the bat in a V with the bottom hand. Essentially the squash ball allowed him to overcome his tendency to lead with the bottom hand, which of course carries with it a greater risk of giving an edge. Or looking at it another way, the semi- squash ball allowed Gilchrist to overcome a flaw in his technique, however temporary that may be. He evidently felt that without the squash ball he would not be able to maintain the ideal grip, for his particular style of batting, over a protracted period of time. Also I would say that if inner gloves could achieve the same result then why did he not simply use these?
My substantive point here is that the comparison of the use of the squash ball to inner gloves is flawed. Furthermore, as far as I can see the accutriments used by batsmen inside ther gloves (e.g. padding, finger stalks etc) offer a higher level of protection: they do not materially effect the posture of the hand. Thus I would say that Gilchrist did gain a distinct advantage from the use of squash ball when compared to what batsmen hitherto have used inside of their gloves.
In short Gilchrist is guilty of nothing more than exploiting and exposing a loop hole in the existing cricket regulations. The squash ball did not turn Gilchrist into a fantastic batsman for he was that already, but it did help him overcome a chink in his armour through questionable means. I’m sure he did what he did in good faith without malice, but that does not mean what he did is not questionable.
The essential question for cricket fans of all persuasions is this: should batsmen be allowed to use artifical devices to enhance or overcome flaws in their technique? My own personal opinion is that if the answer to this is yes, then we are opening a Pandora’s box: with the ever more sophisticated technology at our disposal there are many new clever materials and mechanisms that could easily be incorporated into a batsman’s glove that will aid him above and beyond mere protection? Is this the road we really want to go down? Should we not keep the essence of the game simple, i.e. a fair contest between the natural talents of the bowler and batsmen?
I think the solution is for law makers of cricket to henceforth put strict limits on what can be construed to batting gloves and to define these clearly in the laws so that ther is little ambiguity as possible (unlike the present situation). Regulations in all spheres of life have to evolve over time as new challenges emerge and cricket laws are no exception. Other sports have to do it.
Please note that this posting is free of any racial or nationalsitic slurs (which unfortunately seems to have reached a crescendo in this thread), explicit or implied; I would hope that any responses to it are made in the same veign.
LikeLike
As you would expect, the matter has been thrown out by the governing body.
I chuckled myself to sleep last night after reading the tripe on this page.
Those sour grapes sure are tasty.
LikeLike
Paramjit Singh
Your analysis though couched in civic niceties is a load of donkey twaddle.
Next, you will be telling us that the turbans when worn at an angle will stimulate gray cells:)
LikeLike
Doddi,
smart man, I agree that Singh sings a load of cods wollop. All technological advances in any game are welcome, obviously he hasn’t heard of the new bat handle that has been invented and as there are no rules with regard to the handle but only the blade and its composition, I suppose the next round of twaddle will emanate from the same quarter when it is used by the Australian Batsmen.
Singh and CO: live in the the 50’s. Quite rightly Doddi indicates that the next fiasco may be the “turban” with so many yards of cloth do they hide some abrasive material that when the ball is rubbed against will scuff it for the spinners. ?????????? What if an Umpire wants it removed for verification “”””” hell will be let lose””””.
Reading the latest I hear the ICC have thrown out the appeal. Pity they did not request the S/L Cricket Assoc: to grow up.
LikeLike
The Umpire has ruled. Read below. Now you can all please just SHUT UP, especially Kangadaran Mathivanan you stupid git!
Adam Gilchrist was entitled to use a squash ball inside his glove when batting during the World Cup final, cricket’s lawmaker said Tuesday.
The Marylebone Cricket Club said Gilchrist had not acted against the laws or spirit of the game.
“Gilchrist’s use of a squash ball was designed to alter his grip on the bat whilst at the crease, something which he was perfectly entitled to do,” the MCC said in a statement Tuesday.
Gilchrist scored 149 runs as Australia defeated Sri Lanka by 53 runs in the rain-affected World Cup final on April 28 in Bridgetown, Barbados.
Sri Lanka Cricket secretary Kangadaran Mathivanan objected to Gilchrist’s tactic, describing it as unethical and claiming it gave him an unfair advantage.
The MCC said the relevant rule only stated what external protective equipment was allowed.
For batsmen, helmets, pads, gloves and forearm guards are all listed as permitted.
“None has any definition or prescription,” the MCC said.
“Since there is no restriction in law even on the external form of batting gloves, let alone the interior thereof, no law has been breached.”
LikeLike
Gilchrist is the best one day batters in the world and he is also one of the most genuine cricketeres going around. He has an extremely high level of sportsmanship. Remember him walking in the lastt world cup. No-one seems to be talking about that now. His squash ball idea was not illegal or immoral. Get over it Sri Lanka
LikeLike
Ps. sammy, you make some very good points. Good n you for feeling so strongly about this. I can’t believe people are questioning Adam Gilchrists credability.
LikeLike
I suppose we can count on the Sri Lankans now doing a BELLY DANCE rather than all the Belly Ache we have seen from them
LikeLike
Paramjit Singh you make more sense than anyone on the side for questioning the squash ball. You have reduced the argument to the reality….not some magic effect but that the piece of rubber (half a squash ball) helping him with the positioning of his grip. No one in support of Gilly is saying otherwise, Gilly himself said this is why he did it. Where you lose track again though is that you say this is against the rules. You seem to be taking a superficial look at cricketing gloves as a protective item only. You need to talk to a glove manufacturer and people like myself who play cricket. A good cricketer (such as Gilly) will tell you that the glove protects but has also got to assist you achieving your desired grip. You can do what ever you like to the glove to achieve this…some have cuts in the pads to allow flexibility, some have extra padding outside the conventional protective positions. You really need to understand this to understand why no one other than Sri Lankan fans have a problem with it. Don’t you think that with all the Aussie haters in South Africa, England etc that if there was any substance to this there would be mass support. Instead you have Muruli saying he can’t see a problem with it and so not even all Sri Lankans are with you. like Sammy said:
The Marylebone Cricket Club said Gilchrist had not acted against the laws or spirit of the game.
“Gilchrist’s use of a squash ball was designed to alter his grip on the bat whilst at the crease, something which he was perfectly entitled to do,” the MCC said in a statement Tuesday.
END OF STORY
LikeLike
Its not the end, needs further investigation.
LikeLike
No Sam even now you are clinging on….IT’s been said by an official that’s why they released it….so no one has to listen to your crap anymore until they have time to Put out the official reply.
The Marylebone Cricket Club said Gilchrist had not acted against the laws or spirit of the game.
“Gilchrist’s use of a squash ball was designed to alter his grip on the bat whilst at the crease, something which he was perfectly entitled to do,” the MCC said in a statement Tuesday.
What a joke this whole thing has been……Sri Lanka fans have earned a reputation from this……sad for all the good fair non whinging fans of that nation.
LikeLike
To Doddi Buddi:
My dear amoeba, I suggest that you wear a turban at an angle as your single brain cell is in obvious need of stimulation.
Can’t hang around hear all day – got to go to work now!
LikeLike
Guys, I would hate to be a Sri lankan Cricket fan now. The umpire’s ruling on the Squash ball should shame their questioning of Adam Gilchrist, who time and again has proven to embody the spirit of cricket. Let’s see some apologies go his way to those who have questioned his integrity. You can now stop acting like spoilt 4 year olds throwing a tantrum and acting like mature Adults any time now.
LikeLike
To Sam
Good point. When they put it out officially you can officially shut your mouth.
Moron.
LikeLike
Param
Pity you are not a bowler of any class – if you were I’d target your Turban and send it to the ropes.
LikeLike
Where’ve you popped up from AG? AG doesn’t stand for Alan Gilchrist does it? Are you a buddy of Doddi Buddy?
Anyway, how do you know that I’m a bowler? Moreover, I would have hoped through your obvious wide knowldge on such matters, through the active stimulation of the brain provided by wearing a turban, we know better than to wear a turban when bowling (i.e. to my knowledge no subcontinental has ever worn a turban when bowling). Perhaps you would like to show us how? In fact, perahaps you should don one when batting – give me something to aim at, and what’s more its perfectly within the rules (if you like you could argue that its actually part of the glove!).
LikeLike
C’mon guys! Give Gilly a break. Don’t you know he was born with a congenital defect that prevents him from straightening his wrist 100% without the aid of a squash ball. Hopefully the ICC will change the rules and it will be legal from now on. Hey – they’ve done it before.
LikeLike
S.Samarajeewa Says:
May 8th, 2007 at 9:32 pm
I think its illegal and unsporty and the way he batted that day very strange, I think He was after steroids
No mate, that’d be Shoaib Akhtar.
Get a life loser!
LikeLike
right on JB, right on brother!
LikeLike
have a look at this garbage from Sri Lanka newpaper Sunday Times
They have a whole squash ball inside his glove. If you are going to jump on the band wagon, get the facts right you chumps!
LikeLike
cricket player,
you haven’t answered my question.are you a true englishmen or a aussie.you have tried to let the other people know that you are a englishmen and a neutral who enjoys good cricket.but from inside i think you’re a aussie who thinks if you give your true nationalty people woudn’t believe your comments.
and will you at least KEEP your nationalty REAL.yeah. KEEP IT REAL
LikeLike
Well, i think this is illegal, another player can hide a foot ball in his pads
and kick it for a SIX, this would be the FIRST SIX leg byes
LikeLike
It is more than obvious that Australians were a better side and won quite handsomely. They were never really in any trouble throughout the 7-week long ordeal. Great effort and they seem to take cricket to greater heights professionally, fitnesswise and by all means. Good for cricket. Hope that the other teams caught a bit to generate interest.
Gilchrist’s use of squash ball only helps him get a better grip or hold. Obviously, his muscles aren’t powered up to hit the ball by another 30 miles/hour speed with those gloves or that squash ball. It is much like players customizing bats, pads, helmets etc for better comfort. In Adam Gilchrist’s case, his grip was found wanting and the standard gloves didn’t help quite. That is probably why the Srilankan official is thinking it is unethical in his “personal opinion”.
It is sad to see how some people like Simon, Aussie Winner, Slash, Rusty and Sammy squarely blame everything on the sub-continent. Aussie Winner’s use of sub-continent fanatics and Slash’s usage of words like fatwa show their poor understanding of the sub-continent and lack of knowledge on issues. That would be as ignorant as calling them racists or blaming them for their forefathers committing genocide on aborigines.
LikeLike
You need to get all the Sri Lankan bastmen to try a Coconut, you have plenty in your country, see if that help them
Hey Param Bishan Bedi your countryman was one of them who wore a Turban.
LikeLike
Dear All,
I am fed up with all this silly brouhaha on how the Aussies cheated and so on…Forget the physics of squashed ball, using a regular batting glove assists batsmen to score runs! How about that Paramjit Singh? Wearing a turban actually decreases bone conduction-based hearing. Therefore a batsman wearing a turban is less likely to hear his own thoughts. QED:)
LikeLike
Doddi Buddi: I apologise profuslely for having offended you with the outrageous use of civic niceties. You can rest assured it will not happen again. The turban, tilting or otherwise, is accorded many magical properties, but even it cannot stimulate what is not there. Therefore, my erstwhile, kangaroo shagging, tinnie guszzling bushwanker (oops bushwhacker) adversary, I’m afraid it would be wasted on you! Hope that was uncivic enogh for you.:) I find your second post to be as incisive and illuminating as your first – unless you’re speaking aloud to yourself, thoughts are not heard, merely thought! Are you in the habit of talking to yourself? Would not suprise me. You need to get out more – stop hanging around with the roos; you’re probably better suited to the wallabies-easier to catch I hear.:) Oh, just fyi – I don’t actually wear a turban, but I am quite happy and more than willing to defend turban wearers everywhere!
AG: I’m afraid you’ll have to check your facts. Bishen Bedi never wore a turban on the cricket field. He wore what is called a ‘patka’ (i.e. a much smaller piece of cloth that is worn as alternative to the turban when engaged in sporting activity – see how smart we are?). Oh by the way, with reference to your earlier posting, if I was a bowler of any class then I’m sure we would never meet on the cricket field.
AB: this new technological marvel that you’re so excited about (i.e. the smart cricket bat) – as I understand it it hasn’t yet been accepted as bona fide by the cricketing authorities. No doubt you are salivating at the mouth by the prospect of mediocre batsmen being able to hit the ball out of the park by virtue of its increased sweet spot area. However, I’ve got the perfect counter measure to this smart bat: a magnet – imagine what that might do to the those litlle piezo-electric actuators. Maybe, as you seem to think its OK to slip anything into gloves, an ingenious wickie could slip one into his gloves? Or better still we could make the wickies inners out of smart magnetic material. What say you? See how sneeky, sorry ingenious, we subcontinentals can be, with or without turubans. Oh by the way not all sports have accepted all new technologies unquestioningly as you have suggested: tennis and formula one being cases in point. With any luck it’ll go the same way as the graphite and aluminium nonsense.
Cricket Player: You appear to be the most cogent of all of the ‘pro squash ball’ lobby. However, I would make the following points:
(1) In neither of my postings have I asserted that what Gilchrist did was illegal under the current regulations. What I did say is that it was questionable, and by this I mean it was questionable in the same way that Greig Chappel’s infamous under arm ball was. As you know that was perfectly legal, but was deemed by many cricket followers to be an error of judgement on the part of the Australians as it was felt to be eroding the spirit of fair play. The same can also be said, and indeed was at the time, of the tactics employed by Jardine in the bodyline series.
(2) Once the use of the squash ball became known to the public, it was inevitable and I would say, just and right, that questions should be asked of the authorities, if only to clear up matters once and for all.
(3) The MCC make the following declaration “In this case (Adam Gilchrist in the ICC Cricket World Cup Final), apparently the addendum to the inside of the batting gloves was not for protection from injury, but to improve the way the batsman gripped the bat handle. This should not be considered unfair.” However, to my mind they have not provided ample reason as to why this should not be deemed to be unfair – they merely state it not to be so. It seems that it is the possibility that glove manufacturers could incorporate extra padding to give the same effect as the squash ball on the pretext of protection that seems to be the sole justification for not censuring the use of gloves that allow a batsman to attain a grip that he otherwise might not be able to attain, or sustain. This, in my opinion, seems a rather tenuous and weak reason: the law could could be changed for the future such that no padding is permiited on the inner part of the glove, inside or out, or alternatively any such padding should be distributed uniformly. This would not endanger the batsman’s hand’ in any way as the inside of the hand is adequately protected by the padding on the outer part of the glove (i.e. the inner part is not exposed to the ball).
(4) Rules have been changed in the past (mostly in favour of the batsman as far as I can see). So why not now? For example the rules to do with the number of bouncers that could be balled in one over were changed after representations from those countries who were on the receiveing end of the West Indies pace battery in the late 70’s and early 80’s.
(5) If batsmen are going to be allowed to use artifical means to enhance their skills or overcome flaws in tecnique, then should not bowlers be allowed greater latitude in a similar way e.g. spinners be allowed to use artifical finger tips that give them greater purchase on the ball without damaging the ball. Why is that deemed to be so unacceptable?
(6) My concern here is not so much Australia vs Sri Lanka, but bowler vs batsman. It just so happens it was the world cup final, involving these two teams, that bought these issues to the fore.
LikeLike
Dear Paramjit Singh,
The umpire has declared on the matter. You’ve lost. Shut up!
LikeLike
Hey cricketplayer!
You say that half a squash ball is just a rubber and it is not illegal. Then this will be a good news for glove makers.
I am sure by seeing your thoughts they will produce gloves with a squash ball (ok let’s say half of it) inside hereafter.
Wut nonsense!
LikeLike
Also they will call it Gilchrist style gloves :) if you can remeber ricky ponting style bats (graphite-coated bat)
All to do with bats and balls :)
LikeLike
Sammy,
You’re missing the point – no umpire has declared on the matter, that’s the point. The MCC have offered, what at this stage can only be considered to be an opinion. There can be no offcial adjudication on this matter until as such time offcicial representation has been made to the ICC, and to date this has not happened.
LikeLike
Actually, Ben, they probably will and it will only help those with similar grip problems to Gilly. Some batsmen already have to put two or three grips around the bat for the same reason, the bat is too narrow for their hands so they improvise by adding grips to the handle… Is that cheating?? NOPE! And neither is what Gilly did, and it has been okayed by the MCC as within the rules and spirit of the game.
Have you noticed over the years how gloves and helmets have got better?? It will continue to do so. In cycling they better the helmets, in swimming they use the skin suits etc etc etc…
It’s funny how some see simple innovation and progress as somehow cheating or against the spirit of the game. In the Americas cup it was the winged keel… the Yanks were all up in arms.. of course until they used similar and then it was ok. So long as it is okayed by the governing body of each sport it is OK. No more to see here…. it’s a dead issue.
LikeLike
guys guys .. SOME OF YOU SAID THAT WE SHOULD APOLOGIZE GILLY ..
I have an apology for Gilchrist .. just check whether its ok. but read it with an Indian accent (no offense.. just for fun).
“are pundit jee .. thousand apologies to your royal highness Gil+christ .. we are on our knees .. begging for your forgiveness .. are these stupid fellows what do they know about your cricket ? .. next time you bring a soccer ball, basket ball, rugger ball .. or whatever balls you like .. and play cricket with a squash racket or a tennis racket next time .. we dont mind at all .. you play the way you want .. hell with the rules .. those rules only valid for the sub continent morons .. you dont have to worry about the rules .. ICC and MCC and all the other CCs will take care of you .. ok ? is it ok now ? .. can I go now your royal highness ? okay .. namaste.”
LikeLike
Hey Ben,
What nonsense you peddle. Half a squash ball is just rubber, cut one in half dill brain….try playing squash with it!!!! What a joke you guys are thinking it is anything else. Ohh yes glove manufacturers already use rubber in gloves…..so they can knock themselves out. Ohh by the way check the rules on glove design before proving yourself a moron again.
Anonymous I am British born and bred and proud of it. I also have spent a lot of time in Australia and play cricket there when off season so I love it too. I fight myself during the ashes….I just enjoy the game, and I respect the way aussies play. Clear enough for you. Truly it doesn’t matter you have no substance to argue with if you are concerned about my heritage.
Paramjit Singh you bring credit to the negative argument…truly only person who puts crap aside and tries to debate the actual issue. You accept it is within the rules….very nice to see common sense. You liken it to the underarm incident….nice analogy and I understand how someone whom is upset would view it this way. The kiwi’s still simmer over that and so they should (although I would just recommend they get over it as life has more important things to worry about then dwelling on some wrong that can’t be undone). Problem here is that the glove matter is nothing like it. You need to understand a glove has evolved a long time ago beyond just functioning as protection. Manufacturers worldwide strive to improve the gloves performance with use of numerous materials. If it was just protection look at why you might consider a $200 pair of gloves versus a $40 pair. The protection is the same…..do you think gloves would be pedalled cheaply at the risk of player safety. No on protection they prevent injury as best they can. Where the expensive gloves exceed cheaper gloves is in the performance of the grip, flexibility and ventilation. A number of design features enchance grip and it is important for the game that batsman can design a glove how they see fit to best achieve their maximal grip. It is not unfair it just allows the batsman to bat properly without the concern of glove design impeding his grip. Again if Gilly feels his grip is better with a piece of rubber in the glove then so be it. As I have explained but everyone ignores Sachin TENDULKAR used modified gloves and had them tailor made to enchance his grip…..this was not in the name of protection. Please don’t call Tendulkar whom I am sure poor lochana would truly pray too a cheat. Tendulkar did what he was allowed to and thankfully so so the rest of the world could see his brilliant batting not impeded by poor glove design.
Remember rubber is not foreign to glove design and is in gloves today. Remember gloves do more than protection. On this no one seems to have any reply except but it is a sqash ball……anyone who thinks this sorry you are a dill….please feel free to play squash with half a squash ball….what a joke.
Hope this helps
KEEPING IT REAL
LikeLike
Hmm Doddi just on a side note as a scientist whom is involved in the medical field I can tell you that a turban does not interfere with bone conduction hearing it may block normal external ear conduction by physically blocking the airway if worn across the ears, but not bone conduction. Besides anything this is totally irrelevant. I agree with your thoughts on Gilly and this crap argument and yes call someone a dill when there are many here who think half a squash ball is not rubber. But don’t reduce this to a sledging match and especially one of ill informed direction.
LikeLike
But doddi on your valid point “using a regular batting glove assists batsmen to score runs!” you are correct and they have no comback….just don’t need to get into area where you comments could be interpreted as against a culture. Aim them at a person no problem who is deserving but do not need to take broad shot at whole culture as many people do on these sites. On the argument at hand your ability to reduce it to the simple fact “using a regular batting glove assists batsmen to score runs!” is nice and yes they have no reply. They do not understand innovation and that numerous glove designs are permitted and allowed under the rules for very good reasons.
LikeLike
I do seem to remember a certain sri lankan captain calling for a runner in a limited over international at the MCG simply because he was out of puff due to obvoius obesity. I sure I dont have remind sri lankan cricket fans that their staff bowler took 95 test wickets with a new delivery before it was actually found to be a “throw”. The rules were then changed to obviously appease the masses and avoid the usual accusations of racism and whinging. The reality is Adam Gilcrhist is a freak crickiter. He has produced innings like this time and time again, Squash ball or no squash ball. I personally got great satisfaction from watching his demolition job, simply to punish the Sri Lankan management for their appaling excuse to rest their three top line bowlers in the previous pool match. Bit of a back fire that one. When is the rest of the world going to realise if you give these guys a chance they punish you. Champion teams dont make excuses, they examine the reasons for poor performance and get on with it ( eg. australia after the 05 ashes loss and recent one day performances). Asian teams need to accept resonsibility for their poor performances and get on with it. This is the ausatralian way. Then we might see some thrilling contests!
LikeLike
Srilanka lacked ‘REAL BALLS’ to win on that day .
they now complain on the squash ball of Gilli .
Correct your bowling action . couple of decades back when neutral umpires did not exist .You guys were never in the habit of giving a srilankan batsmen out . Now dont tell the world about ethics in cricket …Islanders
LikeLike
ummmm Poor-apara
Maybe you’re too poor to afford a map.
But the last time i checkd, Australia was a Island too!!
Australia was never a country big on ethics, perhaps
they should learn the meaning…. it’s similar to morals,
having a unfair advantage over others is ethically wrong.
let me help the Australians understand better, it was unethical
to hunt aboriginies with guns when they had none. You don’t
want to go to a gun fight with a sword now do you?
Just like you shouldn’t go to the CWC finals with a squash ball.
it’s cricket, not squash.
I’m sri Lankan, my husband is Australian. I only hope my kids
will adopt Sri lankan values.
LikeLike
Roxy your welcome to a free ticket back to Lanka, they’d love to enlist you and send you to the north, the tigers await your coming. They tellme they play cricket as well but have grenades in their gloves.
One “kaboom” and you will beb history
LikeLike
Roxy you are full of it, like all before you against rubber in a glove you don’t know what you are talking about. The fact is you are squirming because you have been shown to be wrong. Instead of admiitting it you now cling on to against the spirit. You clearly don’t understand the true reasons behind the design of a glove and the brilliant innovation of Gilly’s batting coach in coming up with an idea to try to help without consulting the expense or time of a glove manufacturer. Not that it matters even if it was why can’t any of you dills see that half a squash ball is not a squash ball or do you claim to play squash with one cut in half….what a joke. I say it again do you think Sachin Tendulkar was cheating when he used modified gloves, I think not but you must think so if you think modified gloves are unfair. ARE YOU CALLING THE GREAT TENDULKAR A CHEAT?
You have been challenged with some perhaps unfair critisism outside this debate but instead of sticking to the debate you like so many before you stoop to the same level but take it further by presenting your own limited knowledge of Australia on the whole. This to me is showing what really is the problem here, most of the negatives have some hidden hatred for Australians based on an ignorance of Australian culture. The Australian cricket team play a game of sport and do not represent Australia in anything but that. The fact you even mention some of the things you do in this thread shows you are just as bad. The critisism levelled against you might be unfair at times but some of it does show you certaininly do not occupy the moral high ground as you seem to think you can claim. Just on your cricket team and not your nation some people have pointed out Ranatunga used a runner a number of times simply because he suffered from lack of fitness, likely challenged further by his obesity requiring a greater demand of his cardiovascular system. As a kid I knew exactly what he was doing and even a 2 year old could tell you what he was doing, the Sri Lankan fans that think their team has some moral high ground in the history of cricket need to take a deep look at themselves. The fact Sri Lanka has a rich deep history outside cricket with evidence of settlements in Sri Lanka by 130,000 years ago, probably by 300,000 BP and possibly by 500,000 BP or earlier is great but I feel sorry for your husband as you clearly lack understanding of Australian history and it’s modern culture. I truly hope that no one in modern Australia thinks what happened to Aboriginal Australians during the time of European settlement was good and any that do are certainly on their own. Sure even today the health of modern Aboriginal Australians is not where it should be but this is not the consequence of a collective desire for that to be the case rather the consequence of a vast array of social inequities that are difficult to adddress and beyond your comprehension so I’ll leave that for a thread with a more intelligent audience. Modern Australia is known as a multicultural country and has people from vast array of Ethnic backgrounds. It has expanded massively in modern times and has an environment that stimulates innovation and clever thinking like Gilly’s coach, perhaps you should try becoming modern in your approach and appreciating clever thinking and maybe taking a proper look at MODERN Australia and it’s values. It would clearly surpass your PERSONAL (I am not directing this at anyone TYPE of person just those that lack understanding of Australia and feel the need to spread their lack of perfussion to their brian) lack of intelligence. But just to try to impart a little bit of knowledge to you only around 40% of Austalian population derive from England…..total Anglo-Celtic population is less than 70% from studies conducted in 1999. Yet this has probably fallen further since as it once was over 90% in 1947 and is declining as the diverse sources of countries feeding Australia’s migration program continues to prosper. So the vast majority of Australians do not even come from England and those that do most have been here awhile. Australia has one of the most diverse cultural makeup of the world. I am Brittish but I love Australia and certainly do not associate myself in any way to some of the wrongs of Australian colonists in the past, you need to grow up and if your husband can’t educate you about MODERN Australia then you should do a little bit more research before highlighting your lack of intelligence.
KEEPING IT REAL
LikeLike
Roxy,
Australia is not an Island it is a Continent next thing you will be telling your kids Africa is an Island as well – I happen to have done some reasearch on the Lankan history and bot haven’t you got some skeletons in the cupboard – what do you think the current struggle in the Country is all about – the Tamils feel disadvantaged and deprived of a say – do you condone this, I say not and I don’t think the Australians are happy with what happened to the Natives, but that is history that the present generations abhor – if your Sri Lankan values are such a high status why are you in this Country – if you have no afiliation to this country and think your Country of birth is better then by all means return to this wonderful country we have and will not bitch your leaving. Feel sorry for your husband “poor bugger” I suppose he is caught between the proverbial “squash ball and glove”.
LikeLike
Roxy AG is right before you embarass yourself with the island stuff again goto:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_islands_by_area
Australia is arguably an island/continent but on the island aspect there is no standard of size which distinguishes islands from islets and continents. Any landmass surrounded by water could be considered an island. Under this terminology all the land masses on the planet could be considered islands. Officially Australia is a continent hence why Greenland is given the title of world’s largest island.
http://didyouknow.org/islands.htm
Anyway you need an education obviously so just trying to help. Please feel free to read my previous entry to you…..you might learn something about Australia and this debate.
Hope this helps
LikeLike
Anyway just a reminder as none of you seem to be getting it, it has been ruled by MCC this is not against rules and not against spirit:
Muruli like the true champion he is (a true champion knows when they are beaten on the day and is gracious in victory as in defeat and yes Murali is one of these) said “If anything, I would think having a squash ball in your glove would be uncomfortable. I don’t know if I could even hold a bat with something like that in my glove. So if [Gilchrist wants to do it], it is OK with me.”
High ranking SLC officials have stated they don’t have a problem with it and are upset over this whole thread generated by misinformed fans. They have said they don’t want to appear as cry babies (they actually used these words) and unfortunately you cry babies are appearing just as that. Let your team enjoy their finals appearance, celebrate, stop tarnishing it for your own team…..stop looking like cry babies.
The MCC has ruled but apparently you sore loosers know better than them:
http://www.lords.org/latest-news/news-archive/mcc-gilchrist-did-not-contravene-the-law-or-spirit-of-cricket,850,NS.html
“The Law specifies only what external protective equipment is permitted for particular players. The only item for which any specification is given is wicket-keeper’s gloves. Helmets, external leg guards (batting pads), batting gloves and forearm guards (if visible) are all listed as permitted for batsmen. None has any definition or prescription. Since there is no restriction in Law even on the external form of batting gloves, let alone the interior thereof, no Law has been breached……In this case (Adam Gilchrist in the ICC Cricket World Cup Final), apparently the addendum to the inside of the batting gloves was not for protection from injury, but to improve the way the batsman gripped the bat handle. This should not be considered unfair. Similarly, it has never been considered unfair for batsmen to use two grips on the bat handle. The glove manufacturers might, for added protection against jarring, have put an extra pad of some cushioning material as an integral part of the inside of the palm. This would be entirely legal, but have the same effect on his grip for a batsman who wore such gloves.
In conclusion, the incident could not be classed either as contravening the Law or as breaching the Spirit of the Game.”
MCC’s Laws Sub-Committee
https://churumuri.wordpress.com/2007/05/01/how-legal-was-adam-gilchrists-hidden-ball/#comment-34128
LikeLike
All of you stop talking crap. Gilchrist is a legend. Once in a lifetime player, capable of playing a once in a lifetime innings, like in the final. Half a squash ball is a piece of rubber. Its a personalisation thing, and is no different to having a bat custom made, or gloves custom made for comfort or for ne other reason. I have tried the squash ball thing in practice recently to see wat difference it makes. It makes it virtually impossible to hit across the line of the ball restricting your comfortable options to hitting the ball straight. Having said that, Gilchrist did still score runs square of the wicket in that innings, so i dont see that it made much difference. I have seen gilly bat like that before in matches, so it was no surprise that it happened that day. The way you ppl are talking its as if the squash ball gave him some sort of super human power to strike the ball. Absolute rubbish. The australian way of playing the game is hard but fair. Thats the way to play
Ppl will stop giving the sub-continent a hard time, when they give up this apparent persecution complex, and survival of the fittest mentality. Cricket is a team sport. There is no ‘I’ in team. Yet the pakistan team are unpredictable because they dont know who is stabbing the other in the back, they dont know who is fixing games, and they dont know who is murdering the coach. Members of the Indian team think they are more important than the team itself. It took an australian to highlight that, never mind him being a hopeless coach. Sri Lanka are a good team, but you ppl are damaging their credibility by talking about the aussies cheating. Stop it. Your disgracing Sri Lankans in doing so.
LikeLike
OH yeah and murali is a chucker. Im a tamil, im of sri lankan origin. But there is no doubt in my mind, that his action is not legal.
LikeLike
Roshan,
No one brought ethnicity into this thread, where it was done it originated from your side of politics.
Murali was brought into the conflict to illustrate the absurdity of your countenance on the legality of Gilchrist’s use of half a squash ball in his glove, murali’s bowling action from day one was challenged even one of the most respected impartial captains Steve Flemming still questions his doorsa, that parallel was illustrated on to expose that “sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander”. Nationality is not an issue but in totality the sub continent as mentioned in most instances is a “grievance centre” and any objections raised by any other western country is regarded as racial/tribal.
When Sri Lanka wanted admission into the test arena Australia was at the forefront to support their application. You have employed 4 Australian Coaches and I say the chances that you will appoint more is as sure as day follows night. The reason is because they are considered the most professional.
You being Tamil matters little to the debate, if you are in Sri Lanka you are obviuosly in a safe haven where there is no threat to your well being and we hope that the rest of the country will return to what we have known it to be, a friendly outward looking nation eager to attract the $ as most tourist countries strive for.
I know of many Sri Lankans who have settled here and when the two countries battle it out on the field they enjoy the robust nature of the conflict and it will continue so long as “dick heads are kept out from spoiling or marring the the feud after all at the end of the day it is only a sport.
Those Sri Lankans that are resident in this country but continue to think that SL is the best place on earth, should have the fortitude to get on their bykes and ride back the long trail to Mother Land.
The Brits took a canning that you would have thought they’d have brought down the “Big Ben” after all the fanfare they had on their win last time round. The team arrived back after a thumping never seen since 1927 or so, a 5-0 drubbing, ney they dwelled upon the defeat took it on the chin and moved on, they will come the better for it and mark my words they will look to an Australian to map out and plan their return much like they did with Rodney Marsh. We lost the last ashes 2-1 but did we whinge no Sir, if there was any it was that out players failed to perform to their high standard, we did not register any grievance that the reason for the “reverse swing” was attributed to saliva being applied from sucking lollies.
So grow up all you Sri Lankans and other sub continent whingers, be the sportsmen and women you should strive to be and we hope that the next round of test matches between SL & India will provide the entertainment we look forward to having.
LikeLike
By the way to those on the Sub Continent that were not privy to watching Gilly’s 100 against England scored in 52 balls, missing by one ball to beat Viv Richards’s innings, his World Cup innings was not a fluke nor was it assisted by half a squash ball, if you are you are only deluding yourselves. He has and will continue to score at a rapid rate that no other batsmen can come within cooee of his achievements. You can put all the names like Tendulkar, Dravid, Arivanda, Jayasooriya, Petersen and a couple of others but none have consistently scored better than a run a ball throughout the entire period and I hope I will witness many more from him before he considers it time to hang up his boots.
LikeLike
FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO WOULD RATHER NOT LET LOGIC, REASON AND FACTS GET IN THE WAY OF A GOOD ARGUMENT I SUGGEST YOU SKIP THIS POSTING.
I’ve been on a self imposed ban from this bloggging in the hope of getting a life, but I find I’m like the proverbial moth to the flame, so here goes.
To Cricket Player
I’m glad to see that you appear to have a modicum of empathy for the view that the use of external accoutrements by a batsman may be viewed as dubious in some quarters, and seem to recognise that such a view is not completely devoid of rationale and logic. You, of course, then go onto explain in detail why you think this view, although comprehensible, is ultimately flawed. Let me reciprocate the attention to detail for the devil is in the detail.
The pricing of gloves, like any other mechandise, is influenced by many factors: quality of materials and workmanship, image, brand name and ultimately whatever the market will bear. No doubt that the grip afforded by a glove is an important factor. However, as far as I know, there are no gloves, tailor made or otherwise, that allow the batsman to attain, or maintain through a stroke, a posture of the hand and wrist relative to the bat handle that he would not otherwise have. Can you cite a specific example of such a glove?
All of the features that you cite as adding to the expense of batting gloves (i.e. ventilation, flexibility, a more secure grip) add to the comfort of a grip that the batsman has by dint of his own natural abilities or training (incidentally the squash ball was originally used a training aid to train Gilchrist to attain a certain posture of the hand). None of these features, as far as I can tell, actually yield a new posture of the hand and wrist. Let me state clearly that I have no problem with the batsman being as comfortable as possible in his chosen posture. This is why I have no problems with the use of inners or multiple grips. In the case of the multiple grips, assuming that they are rolled out uniformly along the length of the bat handle and not allowed to bunch up anywhere, then all they do is to allow the batsman to hold his bat more comfortably and securely. Where I have grave misgivings is when features are incorporated that allow him to have an altogether different posture. I cannot help feel that this is patently unfair and nothing in the arguments that you and others have presented thus far convinces me otherwise.
On the matter of Tendulkar I would simply say this. If he has used gloves that allowed him to attain a posture of hands and wrists that he would not otherwise have been able get, then his actions should also be deemed to be questionable. Perhaps he may have escaped scrutiny because wherever he did it was not so keenly followed by cricket fans the world over as the World Cup, or their use did not have such a marked effect on the match.
As a corollary to the above explanation consider this. A profiling of the bat handle would also allow batsmen to attain whatever posture they desired. Would that be deemed to be fair by the cricketing authorities? Would everyone be so sanguine about it as they appear to be about glove gate?
I reiterate what Gilchrist has done, although not illegal, is to pose a serious question with respect to the balance between batsman and bowler. The cricketing authorities (and by this I mean the ICC not the MCC, for they are ultimately they are the ones who can reshape the laws etc) should consider its implications seriously and not view those who have real and legitimate concerns as a bunch of wild eyed, ant-Australian fanatics who are pouring forth bile from the sour grapes of defeat.
To AG.
By citing Mralitharn’s action in the scope of ‘whats sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander’ are you not in danger of undermining your own position? On the one hand you say that what Gilchrist did was perfectly within the rules and spirit of the game, but at the same time you say even if it wasn’t it would be O.K. because Muaralitharan has been allowed to get away with an illegal action, so why should Gilchrist not be allowed to get away with it. Is this not self contradiction?
Anyway on a more general point, by what moral authority do those who won’t accept Murallitharan’s action as legal expect those who have doubts over the ethics of the use of the squash ball to simply accept that what was done by Gilchrist is beyond criticism, scrutiny and questioning? As far as I know Muralithran has undergone more independent scientific scrutiny of his action than any other bowler before him and these tests show that the straightening of his arm is within the range of straightening exhibited by most bowlers, including Bret Lee. Moreover these tests were conducted in Australia by an Australian expert. Could it be that these fans are impervious to rational scientific investigation? Why are they so unwilling to accept the conclusion of a technology that for the first time allows a proper, rigorous, impartial and scientific scrutiny of bowlers. Whose winging and wining then? Subcontinenetals or these luddite Australian fans?
On the one hand they are happy to quote the voice of officialdom in the guise of the MCCs opinion on ‘squash gate’, and offer this as a reason for those on the opposite side of the argument to stop bleating, yet they singularly fail to do this themselves with respect to Muralitharan: they avail themselves of every possible opportunity to ram home their indignation at Murali being allowed to continue to bowl. Isn’t this just good old fashioned hypocrisy? Do you not see how this appears to be double standards? Have these Australian fans moved on? Have they put this behind them? Judging by the bile that has been poring forth on this subject in this thread, the answer would appear to be patently not.
Your point about the stick sweets is a good one. But was it always the case. Do you remember the furore surrounding reverse swing in the early 90’s when it was only the Pakistanis who appeared to have mastered it? Were they not accused of ball tampering etc? Was this new skill they had honed embraced as a positive innovation within the rules and spirit of cricket by England and Australia? My recollection is not.
LikeLike
Peram
You certainly have tempered your stance as this tread grew and I can accommodate some of your logic but only marginally.
Australia had a couple of suspect bowlers and from memory I think only Meckiff was called for throwing in a test match, Benaud the Captain then took him off and he never ever appeared in another test match. He could have had the same abnormality that Murali has been diagnosed. Only one specialist and here I acknowledge it was in Australia that the tests and diagnosis was made, but wait a second, he was a specialist practicing in Australia but also happened to Sri Lankan in Nationality. No other renowned medical authority or personnel have supported his finding which is something I question. Had Australia defended Meckiff as resolutely as Sri Lanka did then maybe the rules would have been changed in the 60’s rather than in the 90’s. I suppose the argument then would be that medicine had not advanced to the degree it has now. I have deliberately wondered to this logic just to illustrate that technology will keep evolving like it or not and the moral to that is if you can’t be ahead and accept the changes then at least be abreast it or we will all be fighting wars with bows and arrows.
The question of reverse swing also has come a long way, the Paks initially “invented” reverse swing if I can use that term but prefer saying they pioneered the art by scuffing oneside of the ball. This was identified and irradicated as ball tampering was always banned. Experimenting with other substances has been on since and will continue. I lay the blame on all sides but again some of these irregularities that creep up seem to transcend from one part of the globe. But I agree who or wherever these emanate from are damaging the game.
On a less contentious point Australia have banned their tour of Zimbabwee, I wonder how many would support that stance, the last time this occured was during the Apartheid era and it did bring about the desired effect. Does Australias stand, which in reality should have been led by the ICC, gain the support from other playing nations. I know I am tramping on dangerous ground here as sooner than later someone will question the rights of a Country now in the test arena also being dealt the same response. I’ll leave that debate to emanate.
LikeLike
When I mention South Africa and the apartheid era I am conveniently avoiding the issue that India and Pakistan banned cricket amongst themselves because of war for many years than I can recall and it was by the two countries and not a ruling by the ICC.
LikeLike
Paramjit Singh,
You raise an interesting point about bat handles. I have a book in my collection in which Don Oslear, an English umpire who is/was considered one of the best, presents and then discusses the Laws of Cricket (1992 code). In it, he mentions bat handles, and according to him, any shape of bat handle is permissible. The only restrictions are that of size and capacity to damage the ball.
LikeLike
Dear Paramjit Singh,
You will get a life when you realise that the MAJORITY of the ICC cricket playing nations do not think Gilchrist cheated…including many of your senior players and your board. Now please do us all a favour and SHUT UP!
LikeLike
To Sammy:
Sammy, sammy, sammy, you need to take a chill pill – you’re getting yourself all worked up. You really should have heeded the advice given at the head of my last posting, but it seems you just could not help yourself – you just had to read what I had to say. If you do not want to hear any opinion other than your own, then stop visiting this site to browbeat and harangue others. However, as you appear unable to help yourself, and as unpalatable they maybe to you, here’s a few more offerings from me.
You seem to be claiming that the majority of the ICC members have no interest in discussing this matter any further. How did you arrive at this conclusion? Surely the best way to see if there is a majority in favour of not discussing this topic is to simply put it to a vote of the ICC members. This is yet to happen, if at all. Moreover, I am more than happy to accept the ICC’s decision on this matter when you and those of your ilk do likewise with respect to Muralithran’s bowling action. Until as such time, I would suggest that you follow the orders that you have been barking out at others and SHUT UP!
LikeLike
I was tempted to share my opinion on the ‘squash ball issue’ but won’t bother as many of you (and I definitely mean both camps) don’t seem interested in a debate of the real issues but simply in displaying your vile prejudices, hypocrisies, or at the least, your ignorance of even the basic facts of the matter. Not to mention complete ignorance, may be intentionally, of past issues that are mostly irrelevant here if this is being argued in a reasonable manner. I won’t point out individuals because you know who you are and . . . To the few people who are trying to have a rational argument and being dragged down by the rabble, I congratulate your effort, but looks like you are wasting your time. I challenge everyone not to let down your respective sides and to keep future postings civil. Congratulations to Australia on a great tournament, and congratulations to Sri Lanka on reaching the finals as well. Proud to be Sri Lankan cricket fan!
LikeLike
Hey Crazy
“Congratulations to Australia on a great tournament, and congratulations to Sri Lanka on reaching the finals as well. Proud to be Sri Lankan cricket fan!”
Been a longtime waiting for someone from the other camp to fianally acknowledge what you have done, we did this when we were beaten by a better team on that occasion.
Your support and affiliation for your country is understandable and commendable. It was our day, it was a tournnament we had the better of all sides in every department and as sure as night follow day your turn will come again but I doubt that would be in the coming series at the end of this year. Maybe we could recommend an AUS coach that might help you as they have led you to some great heights.
LikeLike
Dear Paramjit Singh,
You say “if at all”?
I rest my case.
Now please just SHUT UP!!!!
LikeLike
The entire final was set up by ICC to make sure that it was next to impossible for Sri Lanka to have any chance of winning. Match reduced to 38 overs, Aussie batsman run on the pitch, SL bat in near darkness and rain. The ICC should have postponed the match. Australians would have never batted in the same horrific conditions that SL had to endure. Then poor SL after being FORCED to lose are then told the man who hit the century used an illegal device (not ICC approved) to help him hit the ball faster and further. This is like rubbing salt on the wound.
I also remember Ponting revealing that he used an illegal bat in the 2003 final against India where he hit a century.
This is disgusting! Australians seem to be the biggest cheats in the world and regularly accuse Asians of cheating so that the attention would be drawn away from them. It is a successful ploy because anyone who questions an Australians legality is INSTANTLY called jealous, paranoid, sour grapes blah blah blah! Australians two fastest bowlers (Lee and Tait) are both chuckers (watch slow mo replays) and yet HARDLY ANYBODY realises or dares to mention it. Instead everybody attacks Asians like Akhtar and Murali. The racist white media will always add fuel. I live here in England and whenever and Asian bowler takes wickets against England, his bowling action is INSTANTLY scrutinised by the commentators and the media. The Aus media is ten times worse. They even have debate shows after news to talk about how ICC are allowing Asian cheats (murali etc) to play etc etc. Everytime SL tour Australia, Murali is harrased by the media, prime minister, fans. Maybe it is time for Sri lanka to harass australians when they tour Lanka? But SL wont stoop to that level, they are too kind and friendly to foreigners to do such a thing.
As for the ICC, Malcolm Speed should be given the sack. He is responsible for arguably the WORST world cup tournament ever!!
LikeLike
Dear UGK
I’m Asian and I’m Australian. Australia won because it was a far superior team than all the other teams in the tournament. The results speak for themselves. Your childish assertion that Australia cheated reflects badly on you and your country. Grow up.
LikeLike
becose of dat cheater we lost da final da cup b’longs 2 us
LikeLike
Question for AB…are you a racist or just plain ignorant. Mate you really need to see what a tosser you sound like. I’m an Aussie and no wonder the rest of the work think we’re all racist when idiots like you open you mouth. Have you ever been thought how to develop an argument because you need help…it doesn’t give you credibility when you contradict your self by saying there’s one rule for Australia and another for the Asian countries. Just shut up!!!
LikeLike