Karl`s PC Help Forums

2nd test match
charles - 31-7-2011 at 17:55

Should Bell have been given out ? I think he should..waggyfinger


crikey - 31-7-2011 at 18:54

Yes, he should, and the decision should have stood. The law is absolutely clear. Instead, we now have a stupid precedent, set in the spurious name of "sportsmanship", and endorsed by the umpires and team managers. No good will come from this.


LSemmens - 2-8-2011 at 03:43

From the news story, he was given a four, which was then rescinded. I feel that the four should have stood or, if, on appeal, it was, rightly, rescinded, he should not have been given out as the play would not have gotten him out anyway. i.e. ball not caught, not run out - ball did not hit the stumps whilst he was out of his crease. Why should he be given out?


charles - 2-8-2011 at 12:10

Quote:
Originally posted by LSemmens[/i Why should he be given out?






'cos he was.....waggyfinger


giron - 2-8-2011 at 12:53

The poor bloke made an honest mistake, he thought it was lunchtime and was wandering off to the bar for a few beers.


Big-Ray - 2-8-2011 at 15:30

To be fair, he was given out.

In the "Spirit of the Game", the Indian team withdrew their appeal, and good for them.

Not the sort of gentlemanly conduct I expect to see in the football over the next few months.

Sadly.
:(


charles - 2-8-2011 at 17:31

Quote:
Originally posted by Big-Ray
To be fair, he was given out.

In the "Spirit of the Game", the Indian team withdrew their appeal, and good for them.

Not the sort of gentlemanly conduct I expect to see in the football over the next few months.

Sadly.
:(




In my opinion, Bell should have said "Thanks very much but I was out,it was a stupid thing I did but I was out"


charles - 2-8-2011 at 17:33

Quote:
Originally posted by Big-Ray


Not the sort of gentlemanly conduct I expect to see in the football over the next few months.

Sadly.
:(


When have you ever seen a footballer cheating ? smokin:


giron - 2-8-2011 at 18:32

Well, there was Giggsy, I didn't actually see him doing it, but it was reported in the papers.


LSemmens - 3-8-2011 at 14:39

Why was he given out? He was not caught, nor was he run out?


charles - 3-8-2011 at 14:45

Quote:
Originally posted by LSemmens
Why was he given out? He was not caught, nor was he run out?


He WAS run out.....waggyfinger


LSemmens - 3-8-2011 at 15:06

In that case, he should be out! The report that I saw did not make that clear, at least, to me!


giron - 3-8-2011 at 15:12

He was found to be totally innocent of any wrongdoings and it was decided that he shouldn't have been outed, so they let him off and let him back in again, apparently. confused2