"If you don't want to get stumped stay in your crease": Nevill

why would they? they just spanked your guys and making something out of this (especially when the guys made a hundred) would detract from that hiding they gave you. Of course they think its a low life act.... THEY arent fools

"Very rarely do they manage to get it, but just because they don’t often manage to get it doesn’t make the rare occasions they do against the spirit of cricket." Yes, yes it does actually. Players used to badger an umpire with ENDLESS appeal and appeal to pressure them for a decision. The DRS has largely removed that from the game, wasnt right then, isnt right now

Because the batsman clearly thought the ball was dead and Neville took advantage of that. Its nothing like a leg side catch and the fact that the "poster child" (laughable assessment) says its ok means nothing. Its no different than when McCullum ran out Murli years ago, technically legal but not right.

No way Its terrible sportsmanship and basically says more about him than anything else. Veeeerrrrrryyyyyy Australian though

Peter Nevill, your behaviour detests most sports minded people. We say to you simply, just grow up and be a man. Your team is a shambles at the moment and Nathan Lyon could not believe what you have done. A very disappointing day for cricket and for sport. Shame!!

No it doesn't Chris for both instances highlight how Aussies do not like it when they are on the receiving end And you are completely misunderstanding I, I have no issue with the act, merely remarking if it happened to an Aussie, the Media would have gone into meltdown

I was stumped exactly this way in a primary school match between Elimbah v Landsborough in 1979. The pain of being dismissed in this embarrassing way has haunted me since.

Nope. I only gave you permission to call me old fashioned mate, please pay attention. And no, blindingly obviously there are any number of ways to get people out, some less impressive than others. Just said the sneaky king hit is my least prefered. And you'd lose your wager too. Again if you'd paid attention I said in this very thread that I'd not be surprised to see wicky's of any hue perform such a dirty trick. You'd be equally wrong to think I wouldn't say so if Bairstow had done it. Right here. Get over yourself. I'm not calling Aussies out, It's not all about you my friend.

Complaining about what seems like a dodgy DRS decision, and saying an opposition keeper somehow breached the "spirit of the game" for performing a totally legitimate stumping are totally different things. The "spirit of the game" thing gets thrown around way too much. If the laws of the game allow for a method of dismissal and you dismiss a batsman that way, how can that be contrary to the spirit of the game? It's crazy. Which is more against the spirit of the game? A "mankad", or the batsman continually leaving his crease before the ball is bowled to try and get a bit of advantage in snatching a quick run? I'd argue it's the batsman's actions, not the bowler's action in running him out. Yet people continually look down on the mankad. Or which is worse, trying to run out a batsman who's left his ground or the batsman sticking his hand out to stop the ball hitting the stumps? I'd say the batsman definitely, yet lots of people were down on Starc after the incident with Stokes). (Starc does have an issue with throwing the ball too close to the direction of the batsman when he gets frustrated and needs to stop that, but that particular time it was a 100% legit attempt to run out a batsman who'd come a few steps down the pitch). We need to stop having a go at players for operating completely within the laws of the game by citing some sort of "spirit of cricket" that somehow outlaws things the laws of cricket don't. The spirit of cricket was never something meant to make people feel bad for doing things totally legitimate within the laws of the game!

Not old fashioned, unaware. So you're only allowed to get people out in spectacular ways, are you? No leg side catches? If a batsman leaves his crease while the ball is live, you run him out. Even Gilly, the poster child for good sportsmanship, said he'd have done it no problem. I would wager London to a brick you would not have come onto these boards to complain had England done it. Any chance to call the Aussies out.

Because it's the sporting response? Because they're currently panning Australia?

Call me old fashioned But I love seeing the bails whipped off as the batsman chances a run and is thwarted by a brilliant pick up; or a sharp throw to the top of the stumps as the fielder falls away mid air; or a wayward gather and throwdown by an athletic and skilled keeper; or a patient trap laid by deceptive wristy luring a goggle eyed batsman down the pitch and stranded. Others seem to like the little sneak approach. The cricket equivalent of the king hit? We all make our choices. I've made mine.

I can't think of any wicketkeeper at any level of cricket anywhere in the world who would pass up the chance to stump a batsman and make him look silly. And good on them. It's not like he pushed the guy out of his crease.

I disagree, it would have been bemoaned in the Aussie Press and on sites like this by the fans as 'not in the spirit of the game' Just look at the times when DRS judgments have adversely affected Australia and the reactions

Sorry, but stumpings are entirely within both the laws and spirit of cricket. Wicket keepers of all countries when keeping to spinners are always watching the batsmen's feet the moment they take the ball and if they think there looks to be any movement where they might be lifting their foot they whip the bails off. The thing is that it's very rare they manage to get the timing perfect like Nevill managed to on this occasion. Ever noticed how keepers all over the world are regularly whipping off bails even when the batsman is in his crease? They are looking for just this sort of dismissal. Very rarely do they manage to get it, but just because they don't often manage to get it doesn't make the rare occasions they do against the spirit of cricket.

I doubt there'd be any sooking, more likely people slamming the batsman for not paying attention and doing something stupid and getting out. That's what generally happens in that sort of case.

It would have been received by people slamming Warner for his lazy batting in stepping out of the crease and getting stumped.

Ditto - this isn't even a story really. Even the Sri Lankans said no problem with it.

I would say a lot of doubt actually. Getting out like that shows a lack of game awareness. Ever played indoor cricket?

"Of course it’s against the spirit of cricket" How?