Ban stump microphones? - World A-Team Cricket Forum

DomainK · #1 (**permalink**) 02-08-2007, 07:40 PM

This is the suggestion of Peter Moors. He believes that players should be allowed to sledge each other without the audience hearing it. Read the story here.

Quote:

They should be allowed to go out there and play the game without being worried that everything they actually say is going to be broadcast. It's something we've discussed as a management team and we've spoken to the match referee about it.

I am surprised, to be honest. Now that the coach and the captain of the English team have made their points of view clear, we know what to expect from the team in future. Its all coming together and it shows the quite a few players also share the thinking. I was also surprised when Prior said that its the job of the 11 players to make the batsman uncomfortable.....of course he didn't mention exactly how. Now we know that the new coach is trying to make the team more aggressive even in non-cricketing ways...may be to match up to Australian standards.

But why remove the stump mic? He obviously wants to get into something that the audience and the media will not approve. Now, what is there that the legally allowed in Cricket that fans will not approve? What could it be that is bad if the world hears but good if no one comes to know? Where is the gentleman's game going?

Nostromo · 02-08-2007, 09:03 PM in reply to DomainK's post "Ban stump microphones?"

I am disgusted by the irresponsible comment made by Peter Moores, but considering he is openly supporting sledging, it reflects the sort of low-down character he must be. He admitted that Prior was chosen because of his unsporting needling of the opposition players! The only correct way for a cricket team to win is to bat, bowl and field better than the other team....period. Otherwise, it just is not cricket anymore, no matter who resorts to other tactics.

I am surprised that there has not yet been an official response to the shameless comments made by Moores. Such people should be relegated to the dustbin of cricketing history.

adamberry

I've got absolutely nothing against sledging, until it gets to the point where it's offensive. There is absolutely nothing in the Laws of Cricket against it, and I challenge anyone who's played cricket to come out and say that they've never encountered sledging. As far as I'm concerned, sledging is part and parcel of the game - if someone sledges me while I'm at the crease, I'll say something witty back. There's nowt wrong with that.

And so, therefore, I agree with not only the volume on the stump microphones being turned down, but being turned off altogether. If sledging gets out of hand and as such, contrary to the Spirit of Cricket, the umpires are there to deal with it. That's part of their job.

And Nostromo - I'd hazard a guess that sledging has been a part of the game since the late 1800's. I doubt any team has ever got anywhere by just batting, bowling and fielding better.

Rachael

Quote:

Originally Posted by Boycott

What concerns me more is that a lot of modern players feel it's acceptable - or perhaps that it's the norm - to take the mickey out of the opposition, to be crude, or to sledge. You've got youngsters now who do it automatically. Why do they need to shout their mouths off like that? The great talkers like Fred Trueman were funny, they never abused the opposition or umpires. I always felt that the best way was to beat the opposition, not to talk him out. Win - that does the talking for you.

I faced all the great quick bowlers, and not one of them ever swore at me, sledged me or behaved crudely. That's what made Clive Lloyd's team champion winners and champion men. They just beat you. They didn't have to sledge. After the way England got beaten in this Test match, maybe they should talk less and bat better at the Oval.

See Too much talk from England - Telegraph

Ninjaman

If sledging is so part and parcel of the game (it might be in England or Australia but not in the West Indies), that everyone has experienced it (I don't deny this is a possibility) that is still no reason to get rid or turn down stump mics.

What do you have to hide?

What is it so secretive that you don't want the viewers or match referee to hear?

Without stump mics you'll see the worst sledging offenders raise their game and ensure they do so out of earshot of the umpire all the while having the ability to deny they said what they said.

The umpire is also there to judge run outs but we allow a 3rd umpire the ability to check a video screen.

Umpires can't hear everything.

darksideofthemoon

I would like the stump mikes turned up. Only the commentators hear what is going on which is unfair.

Nostromo

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ninjaman

If sledging is so part and parcel of the game (it might be in England or Australia but not in the West Indies), that everyone has experienced it (I don't deny this is a possibility) that is still no reason to get rid or turn down stump mics.
.

Agreed. Some people are more sensitive to sledging than others and could easily be upset or distracted to the point where they get out under circumstances under which they might not have done had they been left alone. Where is the fairness in that? Why does a player have to be a hardened semi-hooligan in order to survive on today's cricketing field? This is supposed to be a sporting game of cricket for God's sake, not war.

Players like Matt Prior might have been brought-up to try and win the game through the back door, but it does not mean that the gentleman's game has to make way for the garbage fraternity. Even if sledging has been present for decades or even centuries in cricket, that is no reason to allow it to continue in the modern game. Just like we are trying to move on in fairness of umpiring decisions with new technology, we should also try to clean the game up inside out in terms of unsporting tactics employed to get ahead. What is the point in taking a step forward in one area if you are going two steps backwards in another?

I am in no way exonerating Sreesanth or other Indian players who might resort to such cheap and unsporting tactics. Everyone has long memories and if the English players feel that the sort of approach used by Prior et al is acceptable, you can bet your bottom dollar and more that they'll get it back with compound interest when they tour India. But then of course, the English players and management will come up with yet another long-winded, patronising and hypocritical explanation as to why their own misdemeanours back home were acceptable while those of their opponents are not.....and the battle will go on. Is that where you want cricket to end up?

Rachael

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nostromo

Players like Matt Prior might have been brought-up to try and win the game through the back door, but it does not mean that the gentleman's game has to make way for the garbage fraternity.

That's certainly the view of most senior Cricket Correspondents over here.... and (unusually) none put it better than Michael Henderson:

Quote:

It was a fractious Test at Nottingham and, although Sri Sreesanth, the Indian opening bowler, was the most culpable offender, England did not cover themselves in glory. And it will have surprised nobody who has followed their cricket this summer that the man who has most to learn is Matt Prior, the imperfect gloveman.

This is what Prior had to say on the third evening, after the ludicrous 'jelly bean' incident involving Zaheer Khan: 'It's a tough game. A lot of people are under a lot of pressure. If you can do anything to get one-up on your opponent you're going to do that, as long as it is kept within the spirit of the game'.

He then said: 'It's important to have 11 people hunting together, creating intensity and making the batsman uncomfortable'. Leaving aside the obvious reply, that the best way of making any batsman uncomfortable is to knock his poles out, there can be only one appropriate answer to that sorry statement by the sophomore stumper: balls.

For the benefit of Prior, and Alastair Cook, whose column yesterday referred to something called 'positive energy', Test cricket has always been played with 'intensity'. If it were not, few people would bother to watch. There is also 'pressure', of a kind. That is what international sportsmen are paid handsomely to cope with.

[...]

What Prior really meant was this: 'I'm a lippy so-and-so, and it is my job to make offensive or insulting remarks to opponents to try to put them off their game. This is a necessary part of Test cricket, and anybody who doesn't realise this to be the unvarnished truth is a fuddy-duddy'.

[...]

Test cricket has never been a junior house match. Grown men will behave badly from time to time, though adults usually have the grace to own up to their errors. Instead we are fed rubbish by the team's junior members about 'intensity' and 'pressure' as though we were all born yesterday.

To judge by the face he is happy to present to the world Prior is a buffoon.

Matt Prior the buffoon should grow up - Telegraph

Nostromo

There are good, old-fashioned cricketers even today who do a good job without resorting to cheap intimidation. Matthew Hoggard, Rahul Dravid, Anil Kumble and Panesar are good examples in the two teams facing each other at present. That is one of the reasons that I wish Hoggard gets back soon into the England team. Apart from being a great bowler, he brings a touch of calm decency into the game that seems to be disappearing these days.

*Jonty* · 03-08-2007, 10:00 AM in reply to DomainK's post "Ban stump microphones?"

I do not agree that the stump microphone should be turned down in volume,the general public make international cricket,and are entitled to hear what is going on on the field of play,after all,they pay through the nose for their place in the grounds,so they should hear & see EVERYTHING THAT HAPPENS DURING A MATCH.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode