- Video
-
Club Roar
Captured a great grassroots sporting moment? We want to see it!Content Collections
The Roar Community
- Join
- Login
To Walk or not to walk? It’s a topic that has been debated in cricket for several years, and came to the forefront again in the ongoing Ashes Test series.
One of the worst decisions in recent memory was made when Stuart Broad clearly nicked the ball to Michael Clarke at first slip in the first Ashes Test at Trent Bridge, and was given not out by umpire Aleem Dar.
Instead of walking off straight away, Broad waited for the decision and when given not out, he stood his ground, marked his guard and continued on.
At the time he had scored 47 runs, and after the non-dismissal, he went on to make 65 runs. Australia ended up losing the match by 14 runs as the Test, fittingly, ended on a DRS review.
The comments, opinions and debates have not stopped a month later. Many have blatantly accused Broad for “cheating” and “not walking”, some even took an aim at the umpire Aleem Dar, while others stated captain Michael Clarke should have used his reviews better than he did.
Two Tests later, to the shock and surprise of almost every cricketing fan, no matter what side they were on, Broad walked off immediately after he was dismissed by Nathan Lyon in the first innings of the third Test.
The amazing thing was, he didn’t hit the cover off the ball; only a tiny but noticeable white spot was picked up on hotspot. When that turn of events occurred, life was sparked into the walking debate once again.
Earlier this week, Australian coach Darren Lehmann attacked Stuart Broad for not walking and blatantly called him a “cheat”.
“I hope the Australian public are the same because that was just blatant cheating. I don’t advocate walking but when you hit it to first slip it’s pretty hard. From my point of view I just hope the Australian public give it to him right from the word go for the whole summer (during the return series in Australia starting in November) and I hope he cries and he goes home,” Lehmann said.
Consequently, Lehmann was fined £2,700, as he was found guilty of breaching ICC’s Code of Conduct and was also fined 20 percent of his match fee for the ongoing fifth Test.
In response to the incident, Former Australian captain Ian Chappell called current national coach Darren Lehmman a “hypocrite”, after the latter accused England fast bowler Stuart Broad of “blatant cheating” in the first Ashes Test at Trent Bridge.
Chappell also stated that even though Australians were never renowned for walking, Lehmann should be very careful with his choice of words.
In the spirit of Cricket and in terms of sportsmanship, when a player stands their ground after a howler of a decision, it may be considered as a form of cheating. But there is no specific law in cricket that states a batsman must walk when it is absolutely clear that they are out.
Batsmen are entitled to stand their ground and wait for the umpire’s decision. If they are given not out, even if it’s obvious that they are, everyone should say “it’s your lucky day mate”, instead of accusing them for cheating.
Great batsmen of the modern era; Ricky Ponting, Brian Lara, Sachin Tendulkar, Jacques Kallis, to name a few, never walked throughout their long careers and still, were never called “cheats”. So why should Broad be considered a cheat?
Not everyone is an Adam Gilchrist, in fact, realistically, Gilchrist was the only player in cricket that you would put your money on to walk whenever the dismissal was obvious.
If every batsmen in international cricket was to walk when they thought or knew that they were out, then what is the point of having two standing umpires and a third umpire?
Many Australian fans were almost disgusted when Broad stood his ground. But in the hindsight, the umpire is to blame, not the player.
One could even argue that Michael Clarke was to blame for this. Had he not wasted a review earlier in the innings on a half-hearted lbw call, all this debate would not have made the headlines and as a result, Lehmann would not have been fined.
It also shows that the Decision Review System is flawed and not used for the purpose it should be. DRS, throughout its time, has been used tactically on 50/50 decisions.
The point of DRS is to remove the howler decisions, just like the Broad dismissal. This Ashes series proved that both Clarke and Cook have used DRS as a tactic and have wasted reviews most of the time.
At the end of the day, Stuart Broad is not a cheat. Its not the batsmen who should be blamed, but the umpires and users of DRS for such incidents.
Build your own fantasy cricket team and put it to the test with Draftstars daily fantasy competitions. Pick your match, pick your team and watch the points roll in to take out cash prizes on each match. What are you really gambling with? Set a deposit limit.