To walk or not to walk

[Scott-Wozniak]

Originally Posted by Occasional Fan

I might pick up Nasser's book when I am next in England. The Guardian reviews it this morning, somewhat unkindly saying at the end that Hussain is troubled by many things, including the English language. I mean to say - that's a bit thick coming from The Grauniad!

OF

Nas has never been a walker, and gives his reasons why in his book, which I'll leave for you to read. Take no notice of the review, it's a fascinating insight into the man and his thought processes, well worth reading in my opinion. I don't care about the standard of English, I'm reading it to understand more about what makes the great man tick, and it does that in spades.

While I'm writing, I'll give you my 'take' on the recent spate of 'walks' from the Australians. Maybe I'm just being very cynical or maybe I'm just simply wrong, but knowing how competitive the Australians are and how much they enjoy playing psychological 'wargames' with their opposition, to me this would appear to be the most obvious explanation.

The Elite panel of umpires know and take note of which batsmen walk and which ones don't and they discuss it between themselves. By walking on 'obvious' decisions, the Australians are buying themselves credit in hand when a more dubious decision comes their way. The Umpire will know if they've walked in the past, and this will cast doubt in his mind the next time a 50/50 decision comes his way, which may well be made in favour of the batsman.

If I'm right you'll see Australians 'walking' on obvious out decisions, but not on more questionable ones. If these Australians are truly trying to play in the 'Spirit of the Game' they should walk everytime they know they're out and that is simply not happening. They're just taking psychological warfare to a new level, hardly morally correct or in the Spirit of the game in my opinion.

[Beny]

Gillchrist Introcuced this simply as a way of making the Umpires job easier in what are trying circumstances for even the best Umps to work in. It's fair play but of course the cynics around the world still find some way to bag them for it.

[Occasional Fan]

Scott- you're not the first one to have made that suggestion about reasons for the walking Aussies (though I can't remember quite where I read it before). You may be right. I'd still like to believe there's a little bit of sportsmanship - as opposed to gamesmanship - involved here though.

[Scott-Wozniak]

Originally Posted by Occasional Fan

Scott- you're not the first one to have made that suggestion about reasons for the walking Aussies (though I can't remember quite where I read it before).

OF

Well I made a very similar post on the BBC board not that long ago in another discussion on 'walk or not walk' which seems to be a popular topic for discussion these days. I didn't refer specifically to Australians in that post, but pretty much said the same thing as I've said here. In my opinion 'selective walking' is even worse than not walking at all, at least those that choose not to walk are being consistent, what are those who choose to walk sometimes and not at other times doing, if not to gain some kind of clandestine upper hand? This subject is always going to be one of individual perception, people perceive and beleive things in different ways. Are batsmen who don't walk any less moral than batsmen who selectively walk? or is the reverse true bearing in mind that selective walkers may well be trying to obtain advantage by doing so? It's all perception.

[Beny]

Umpire's nod to 'walkers'

Chennai
October 20, 2004



Umpire David Shepherd has praised Michael Kasprowicz for walking at a crucial stage of the Chennai Test, encouraged others to follow the Australian's lead and denied the honesty-first policy can make a mockery of an umpire's decision.

The veteran Englishman confirmed he was about to give Kasprowicz not out after he edged a ball on to his pads - and into the eager hands of V.V.S. Laxman - on day one of the second Test as Australia tried to avert a quick flow of wickets to Indian spinner Anil Kumble.

Kasprowicz, Adam Gilchrist and Jason Gillespie all walked, but the latter pair were about to be sent to the pavilion anyway. It was Kasprowicz's departure that appeared to leave Shepherd stunned, making him place his hands on his hips and furrow his brow as though he was embarrassed to have been shown up.

That perception, however, was far from the truth. "I saw Michael Kasprowicz straight after stumps and congratulated him on what he did," Shepherd said.

"Batsmen should walk when they know they are out. Of course they should. I talked to the player at my end (Simon Katich) and said I hoped Michael didn't go because I was giving him out. I wasn't. Simon said, 'No, he just thinks he's out.' It's a tremendous thing when a batsman walks. Any batsman who doesn't walk, he knows he is doing the wrong thing."

Shepherd rubbished suggestions that umpires are humiliated when a batsman walks because their authority is undermined and their error exposed in front of a vast audience. "Nonsense - the game is bigger than the umpires," he said. "Things shouldn't be done to make us or anybody else look good.
"We make mistakes and there is no hiding from that, but we only do what we think is right. We are only human and umpiring is not an easy job, you know - in India or anywhere else. We try to get the right result and on the majority of occasions, I think we do. But it can't always be done. It doesn't matter how the umpires are made to look. The game itself is what matters."

Shepherd said Test cricketers had an obligation to behave themselves because millions of youngsters were copying their every move. "If they see these players swearing and carrying on, they are going to start swearing and carrying on as well," Shepherd said.

- AAP

[Occasional Fan]

Spot on, Shep! And as for examples to the youngsters, well, none of them would copy an umpire saying "Bugger me, he's walked", would they?

[flanflinger]

We had a great occasion last season, when we knew their umpire was favouring them. Every decsion he made all day went for them (including an outrageous run-out, which he gave not out, his head had not even looked up from square leg). However, he looked very stupid when he gave another loud not out to one of our appeals (big nick to the keeper), just as he started muttering about "another appeal", he noticed that the batsman had headed off to the pavillon.

[Mike Small]

Gamesmanship? Sportsmanship? What's every one talking about? What difference could Micheal Kasprowikz's dismissal make any way - he is a tail ender for Godness sakes.

[Ernest]

Originally Posted by Mike Small

Gamesmanship? Sportsmanship? What's every one talking about? What difference could Micheal Kasprowikz's dismissal make any way - he is a tail ender for Goodness sakes.

Depends Mike, I tend to agree with you, but I suppose Kasprowikz's dismissal may just have mattered to Australia

Originally Posted by Occasional Fan 21837

Spot on, Shep! And as for examples to the youngsters, well, none of them would copy an umpire saying "Bugger me, he's walked", would they?

Morning OF,Oh I think they just might remember when you was youngER I dont myself, it was so long ago.

Ern

[Beny]

Originally Posted by Mike Small 21884

Gamesmanship? Sportsmanship? What's every one talking about? What difference could Micheal Kasprowikz's dismissal make any way - he is a tail ender for Godness sakes.

Probebly not all that much... But Gilly is another story.