Ok i've calmed down now.

Gilchrist starts to walk when he's nicked it even before the umpire raises his finger because he knows. Hussey "puppy dog eyes" says in the crease when he's nicked it. Who's the more noble man? I suppose the umpire decisions have been terrible recently (Strauss anybody?) But at least Hussey + other players could've been gentlemanly and said "Ok I'm out, I'm walking". But IMO if that had been an England player who had nicked it and stayed in the crease, the umpire's finger would be whipped out and straight up in the air.

Does the batsman have the option to not walk, if he did'nt nick it? Of course not - so he takes the good with the bad. 99 times out of 100, the batsman, who's rather lucritive contract relies on hin scoring runs, chooses to stay rather than put that lucritive contract at risk and walk.
The "non-walker" talking to his wife after the game. "Got a ton today dear - should keep my $500,000 contract safe for a while. Screw walking"
The"walker" talking to his wife after the game. "Was dismissed for 5 today dear. The papers are on my back now, and i might be lucky to keep my spot. We better put the house extention on hold i think. Maybe i should'nt have walked - nobody even mentioned that i did that "

__________________

I'm with you one one thing: no individual player should be pilloried for being a non-walker (so long as they DO take the rough with the smooth and disappear with equal grace when they get good and bad decisions). I don't LIKE to see this... but it's (rightly or wrongly) an accepted tradition... and if Hussey wants to tread that path then sobeit.

With that said... I've a lot more time for those who DO walk... and I do think the umpires should take into account the track record of the batsman: if Hussey stands his ground he should NOT be given the benefit of the doubt... and if the umpire even suspects he MIGHT be out he should be GIVEN out. IF Gilchrist stands his ground... then even if the first instinct of the umpire is that the decision should be out... the umpire should defer to the batsman and keep quiet.

Sure... the umpire should then review the evidence that night to check that Gilchirst was right to stand his ground... and if there's evidence that Gilchrist should no-longer be trusted then that should be made known to all umpires - but until there's evidence that Gilchrist has tried to deceive... he deserves credit for being honest and to be trusted!

On the broader point... I also think the sport as a whole should take a strong position on this matter:

1. At televised games... teams should be allowed to challenge a decision and get it referred to the third umpire.... thus ensuring there's no "rough" that the batsman has to take with the "smooth" when it comes to whether the did / did not hit the ball.

2. Once this is in place... the ICC code of conduct should be ammended to require walking... as the "rough with the smooth" defense will have disappeared in this respect: anyone found to have no walked should be given a serious (say 6 Test) sentence perhaps, suspended in the first instance, but to be served concurrently with a second penalty in the event of a repeat offense within (say) 2 years.

All eminently practical... and whilst it would have no immediate impact at the lower (non-televised) level of the game... the change in the culture of the sport would be immedate.

The biggest problem with requiring walking or the umpires making judgements based on batsmen's reputations for walking or otherwise, is that people can be mistaken, and that includes any batsman who does or doesn't walk. If walking were required what would you expect a batsman to do if he weren't certain whether he hit the ball or not?

__________________
umeiV luphqhsesqe, all’ h luph umwn eiV caran genhsetai.

That's right - no player has to walk, and doubt can arise if a ball has carried to a player or not.

Hussey was out the other night, the fault was with the umpire not Hussey, umpires are paid to get things right.

I think once an umpire has made up his mind though, a challenge should not be allowed mistakes however annoying have to be lived with.
Lessen the authority of the umpire, and the game will be changed for the worse IMO.

__________________
Ern

I dont see an issue with people who either dont walk or do walk, just the people who walk when it suits (ie when theyve walk for big nicks, stay for small ones). Standing your ground isnt really any different to getting your pad outside off stump after its been hit to try and reduce the chances of being given not out, or rubbing your arm when youve gloved one. Batsmen are out when the umpire says they are, and any little tricks they can use to influence the umpire are going to get used.

I see no problem with batsman standing their ground either, especially as they are primarily there to score runs. The longer you're at the crease (in theory), the more you'll score, so if you can get away with the occasional edge then so be it. Umpires are fallible and, in all fairness, human, and so they may miss the tiniest edge. Players (and fans) just have to accept that, that's life.

Alledgedly. ODI in 2005 against Bangladesh at Canterbury, missed a delivery outside off by some distance, yet gave himself out caught at slip:

__________________
"Being second is to be the first of the ones who lose."
- Ayrton Senna

I see you have returned with this simply illogical and unfair idea about umpiring.

Any umpire who uses the identity of the player or team to influence his decision is INCOMPETENT.

Frnakly, you let yourself done by persisting with this idea

Some sports, like those in the USA, already allow coaches to challenge officials decisions and officials also when unsure go to the video to confirm if what they did was correct and rectify if needs be.

Your decision would immediately punish those who got faint nicks and were unsure if they hit ball or pad.

Way excessive and unnecessary.

Also, batsman who are not out but easily impressionable will end up walking when not out as they'll not want to run the risk of that suspended sentence.

---

No, leave it in the umpire's hands.

Give them all the necessary tools to do the job. If all those gimmicks we see on TV (hawkeye etc...) can be perfected to give a high level of certainty all can agree on, then use it.

Allow the umpires to, if they unsure, confer to their colleague(s) in front of the screens to see if there was a nick or if the ball pitched outside off etc.. so that as much decisions as possible can be given. The game of cricket is littered with natural breaks. Everything they can be known by replaying the action should be referrable.

When you have this you can even place the 3rd umpire on equal footing with the field umpires. They can even take turns on a session by session basis. This might make them even sharper. As the session "rest" will do them good. As a portion of the balls delivered, very few are contentious. And if the technological tools show that a player is out but a field umpire is saying not out or not referring it, allow the "3rd umpire" to radio down and tell him what he is seeing on replay.

I'm more concerned that those who do walk, and who have a record of being 100% straight even when the pressure is on to stand, are given the benefit of the doubt up until such time as they show themselves unworthy of that trust.

The "compulsary" bit is tough... and would depend on former Test batsmen satisfying the ICC as to when batsmen do / do not know whether they have nicked it. My impression is that the batsman does almost always know... and if that's the case then I see no problem with compulsion... but if not... I think the idea sucks.

The compromise remains appeals against decisions as now used in tennis: either side might appeal... but they would get no more than two false appeals per day.

I should have put in a 4th catagory

Confusing walker

For 1 player Derek Randall

Some times putting your bat under your arm taking your gloves off and walking towards square leg, just meant my box is uncomfortable and I'm walking over towards the umpire so I can throw everything on the ground and fix it.