Steve Smith is a phenomenally gifted batsman and will deserve his elevated place in the record books when his career ends. But the stench of cheating - and its attendant detrimental consequence on a generation of Australian cricketers - has no trouble following him around.
He breaks the laws of the game. He ignores his responsibility to uphold the spirit of the game. He's shameless and selfish and his actions - note the plural - foment the diminution of the great sport. He is, in the best sense of the phrase, not cricket.
Law 41.12.1 is clear. It is unambiguous. But it is not optional.
It is unfair to cause deliberate or avoidable damage to the pitch. A fielder will be deemed to be causing avoidable damage if either umpire considers that his/her presence on the pitch is without reasonable cause.
What 'reasonable cause' is there for a fielder to damage the pitch, especially during the fourth innings when neither he or his teammates were scheduled to use the batting crease again during the match?
I wonder if he ever thinks of the words of a cricketer who, some years ago, was caught cheating and promised the cricketing public, in front of the world's press that:
'I hope in time I can earn back respect and forgiveness'.
Who was that cricketer, pleading for his future and promising to demonstrate redemption and exemplary behaviour? Steven Peter Devereux Smith.
Smith has the most punchable face I have ever seen. I'd be surprised that when he was born the midwife never considered punching his face rather than slap his arse.
I find it all rather pathetic. I can't imagine what was going through his mind. He doesn't get the difference between being highly competitive and cheating.
I find it all rather pathetic. I can't imagine what was going through his mind. He doesn't get the difference between being highly competitive and cheating.
If you notice it, yes. Smith did two things. One was to destroy the guard that was there. If he'd stopped there, the batsman would have just re-marked it. But the second thing he did was to mark a new one. It's possible that a batsman wouldn't notice it had been re-marked and placed against another guard.
I find it all rather pathetic. I can't imagine what was going through his mind. He doesn't get the difference between being highly competitive and cheating.
I can
I get your point, @chizz. I was wondering how he was thinking he would get away with it.
If you notice it, yes. Smith did two things. One was to destroy the guard that was there. If he'd stopped there, the batsman would have just re-marked it. But the second thing he did was to mark a new one. It's possible that a batsman wouldn't notice it had been re-marked and placed against another guard.
Looking back at the video, it's not clear that he is marking the new guard with his studded swipes that he performed 5 times! That was either the act of wiping it or marking a pretend one. I cannot be sure.
Rubbing out the guard is bad, but to then put another one in !!!
mind you, I am not sure why batsmen have to ask umpires for a guard anyway.
erm, so they know where their stumps are? So they can play a certain side of the wicket to a specific bowler?
I know why they are asking the Umpire (to get their bat in front of the stumps in position they want) I was more pondering as to why they should ask the umpire to tell them rather than make their own decision.
I call that cheating. Anything that is not necessary or disrupts the player /surface is cheating. No ons else apart from the batsman and bowler should be on the wicket.
Rubbing out the guard is bad, but to then put another one in !!!
mind you, I am not sure why batsmen have to ask umpires for a guard anyway.
erm, so they know where their stumps are? So they can play a certain side of the wicket to a specific bowler?
I know why they are asking the Umpire (to get their bat in front of the stumps in position they want) I was more pondering as to why they should ask the umpire to tell them rather than make their own decision.
A batsman cannot view the line of his stump from 22 yards away. The Umpire can.
It has no more relevance that the placement of a football for a corner. A ref spraying the floor to keep a wall at a 10 yard distance. It's just part of that sport.
Rubbing out the guard is bad, but to then put another one in !!!
mind you, I am not sure why batsmen have to ask umpires for a guard anyway.
erm, so they know where their stumps are? So they can play a certain side of the wicket to a specific bowler?
I know why they are asking the Umpire (to get their bat in front of the stumps in position they want) I was more pondering as to why they should ask the umpire to tell them rather than make their own decision.
... because the umpire has the best view and its the gentlemanly thing to do?
Comments
It's not a good example and if it hasn't infiltrated club cricket yet it will do sometime soon...
He breaks the laws of the game. He ignores his responsibility to uphold the spirit of the game. He's shameless and selfish and his actions - note the plural - foment the diminution of the great sport. He is, in the best sense of the phrase, not cricket.
Law 41.12.1 is clear. It is unambiguous. But it is not optional.
I wonder if he ever thinks of the words of a cricketer who, some years ago, was caught cheating and promised the cricketing public, in front of the world's press that:
'I hope in time I can earn back respect and forgiveness'.
Who was that cricketer, pleading for his future and promising to demonstrate redemption and exemplary behaviour? Steven Peter Devereux Smith.
can't wait for the sequel
I'd be surprised that when he was born the midwife never considered punching his face rather than slap his arse.
Takes about 10 seconds to take guard again.
mind you, I am not sure why batsmen have to ask umpires for a guard anyway.
It has no more relevance that the placement of a football for a corner. A ref spraying the floor to keep a wall at a 10 yard distance. It's just part of that sport.
What a load of bollocks.
So he was shadow batting a couple of shots "as a left hander" to visualise how he was going to bat.
Despite being a right hander and it being the 4th innings.
Pathetic.
Stuart Broad: 2-14 from five overs
Sam Curran: 0-8 from four overs
Mark Wood: 0-10 from three overs
Dom Bess: 1-17 from six overs
Jack Leach: 0-15 from six overs
some shocking shot selection for the wickets
3 for Broad
pope injured I believe and not sure on Burns possibly injured as well