Walking. A contentious topic if there has ever been one.
The issue of walking has plagued the game of cricket and the idea of sportsmanship since the humble beginnings of the sport.
There are two sides to this argument.
One of them is sportsmanship, the basic idea that if a batsman is aware he is out, he does not wait for the umpire to make his decision, he simply leaves the playing arena.
More:
>> REPORT: Aussies level Ashes series with 405-run win
>> David Warner emerges from his slump
>> Liebke ratings – Second Ashes Test
The other argument remains ever present. It is the claim that an umpire has a job, and he is standing out with his wide brim and a counter in his hand for a reason.
The umpire’s decision is the final, especially in park cricket terms, so why walk when you may get away with it?
The debate over the controversial topic was reignited on the hollowed turf of Lords.
Jos Buttler, edging a catch to debutant Peter Nevill off the wily off-spin of Nathan Lyon, was given the benefit of the doubt by umpire Kumar Dharmasena.
However, Buttler, not waiting for a decision, turned his back, tucked the bat under his arm and marched his way back to the Long Room.
Immediately, every cricket fan watching became an analytical expert on the topic.
Opinions rose from all corners of the cricket world, some ranging from that Buttler was wrong, chastising him for walking at such an important time in the match.
Others defended the English gloveman, claiming that Buttler’s sportsmanship was healthy for the game, and a fantastic example for the younger cricketers, calling for a greater number to partake in walking.
Walking, simply, is one’s choice. Both sides of the argument are sound and reasonable, but it is the up to the batsman to decide what he does.
Personally, I don’t walk.
Why? Because, as Craig McMillan once said to Adam Gilchrist, “I’m not good enough to walk and still make runs”.
To me, walking is simply giving away that slice of luck you may have.
Nearly every batsmen needs a bit of luck in order to make runs. Sometimes it’s a dropped catch, a chop on that goes for four or a plumb LBW appeal turned down.
Sometimes, that luck is the form of being given not out when you indeed are.
The fielding team will not halt their appeal if they realise that the ball has in fact brushed your hip, and not the edge of your bat.
“Hold on lads, hold on! The ball took the hip boys, no need to appeal there!”
Cricket is a funny game. Claiming a catch when you know it has bounced is seen as deceitful and cheating.
However, appealing when you know the batsman has inside edged it, or he has hit his pad while playing a shot, it is perfectly within the spirit of the game.
It seems as though walking is in that grey area, everybody has a different view on it.
Playing school cricket, my opening partner seemingly played and missed at a ball.
The keeper barely even asked “how is that one, sir?” when my partner had walked off. He had feathered it, and when the next batsman came out, he remarked how good it was to see sportsmanship alive and well.
I replied that he better not walk, as we couldn’t lose another wicket. This lost its effect however, as I ran him out three balls later.
At the end of the day, walking is entirely up to the batsman. It’s a personal choice, and the judgement should not be met with disdain or critical eyes.
It will remain apart of the game for as long as cricket is played.
Personally, I’m not a walker. Some of my teammates are.
It is simply a batsman’s choice to whether he marches off, knowing he is out, or stands silently, waiting for the umpire to make his decision.
13th Man
Guest
Stuart Broad wasn't Australian!
13th Man
Guest
i'm with you. You are going to cop just as many bad decisions where you didn't hit but were given out. I don't feel at all guilty if i feather one and aren't given out and i certainly don't walk. Its luck and its part of the game. Better to try to make the most of a bit of luck than give it away! Obviously with the DRS it is a bit different for international cricketers as if they have feathered it, it will be proven on review. Still you may as well stay in case the team doesn't review. Its not bad sportsmanship by not walking, its just the game.
13th Man
Guest
yep he was in Miami tweeting how he would 'love to help'. Get KP in England if you still want hope of the ashes.
Phil O'Donovan
Guest
The big difference is if you know you have nicked the ball,then you are only cheating yourself.Personally I would prefer not to live with that,but then again I am not Australian.
JimmyB
Guest
Grrhhh. Bloody auto correct. That should also say bearing, not baring.
JimmyB
Guest
I've attempted to edit that without success...Sheek, I don't think of you as a farmyard animal. If you were an animal, maybe an owl.
JimmyB
Guest
That was a response to Rob btw. Sheep I completely disagree. The kind of player that you're describing is not IMO a fair one at all, basically if there's no chance of getting away with one, they'll walk off, if however they might be able to get away with one, they'll hang around. It's pretty standard these days, but let's not hold it up as some bastion of virtuousness, because it isn't. Fwiw, I think Buttler should have let the umpire make the decision, he's playing in the Ashes and he's not going to get any thanks from the Aussies for being a stand up guy. On a seperate note he seems strangely subdued, sort of like David Warner, they are both better players when they are being positive.
JimmyB
Guest
I think you're doing Butter both a great disservice and also giving him too much credit. He walked instantaneously, he didn't stop for even half a second to consider his options. I sincerely doubt whether the existence of DRS had any baring on his actions whatsoever.
JimmyB
Guest
Of course it was walking, it was completely 100% walking. There was no guarantee that Australia would have reviewed, none whatsoever.
Bfc
Guest
Curious about the total acceptance of "hawkeye"...it is still just a mathematical algorithm that 'predicts' the ball flight, and I doubt if it can make allowances for the vagaries inherent in cricket as the ball and pitch condition changes drastically as the innings progress. At least it helps reduce the chances of a clanger...I hope...
michael steel
Guest
I;m with you Dylan, I would never walk for the reasons you have given. You have players contesting decisions all the time so why would you walk. I have many stories from when I played cricket, warehouse no doubt. But I was once given out LBW, dancing down the pitch by my captain who was umpiring. Why because he went out cheaply and wanted to go home. On a more serious point, most of these cricketers are playing for their career, for the big money and maybe their family. As a footballer I never called out "Umpire, Yoo hoo, I pushed my opponent in the back, he deserves a free kick".
Dylan Carmody
Roar Guru
That's the nature of sport I guess, at any sport and any level, players and supporters will happily accept incorrect decisions if it is their favor, but poor decisions against them induce a response of rage and abuse
Dylan Carmody
Roar Guru
There have been many times when technology has failed a batsmen. The point of last Ashes in England, when the English's edges were not registering on hotspot. Another point remains that Usman Khawaja was given out by the DRS when he failed to make contact with the ball last series, so technology cannot always be trusted. Yes, I agree with that point, but things can always get a little messy when there are no official umpires... And yes, its a funny old game we play, isn't it?
Dylan Carmody
Roar Guru
My exact view too, walking is simply not in my blood, the umpire is there for a reason. However, I can understand the morals of sportsmanship and such.
Dylan Carmody
Roar Guru
Thanks mate!
Dylan Carmody
Roar Guru
England's showing on day 4 pretty much outlines how much they miss Pietersen, and what value he could add to a struggling England top order
sheek
Roar Guru
For me it's straight-forward. Obvious, in-your-eye out dismissal, you walk. For example, if the fielder has caught you out clearly above ground, why pretend otherwise. Any doubt about your dismissal, stand you ground & let someone else make the decision. For example, if the fielder's hands have come in contact with the ground simultaneously with the ball, let the umpires decide. Do that & you get the reputation of a fair player who goes when he knows he's out, & who stays when he's in doubt.
Rob McLean
Guest
Comparing walking in park cricket and professional cricket is irrelevant these days due to technology. Buttler walked because he knew, with DRS, hanging around would be a waste of time. He knew he was gone. As for me, at the start of my playing days I was a confirmed non-walker. Then as I started to understand the nuances of the game, I changed my stance. When we have a paid umpire, I stay and let them make the decision. If my team-mate is umpiring, I walk. We're all relying on each other to do the right thing in these circumstances.
Troy Whittaker
Roar Rookie
Yeah was going to say the same thing, Buttler probably knew that he would've had to go soon after being given not out anyway if the Aussie's reviewed the decision ( you'd assume they would have) so wouldn't even class it as walking, more just saving time.
Troy Whittaker
Roar Rookie
"This lost its effect however, as I ran him out three balls later" HAHAHA had me cracking up