Strange moment as SA opener's furious response to unusual Qld act earns him a talking-to

Responding to your absolute language in condemnation of Weatherald. You need to be contextually informed. Any support of unsportsmanlike behaviour such as those Qld boys is unequivocally "disgusting".

Disgust is a strong word Don, enjoy the cricket and maybe if you must feel disgusted violent kicks toward anything should be a candidate. And when one’s thought process gets challenged maybe think about intrigue than ‘disgust’.

That’s not the point Don. Head’s innings was brilliant too, that however does NOT diminish Usman’s dominant innings under pressure. What I’m keen to hear from you is where did you see those nicks you mentioned? Did you even watch the innings? Cause I did, and saw no nicks.

Oh yeah, the tricky, cutesy, no pressure show time stuff was fun but it doesn't compare with backs-to-the wall innings Head played.

Nothing classy about so vehemently supporting systemic unsportsmanlike behaviour. If you were watching the game, you'd be aware of the commentators' comments about Labu, Renshaw and Street's constant sledging. Ussie, at first slip, condoned it. Everything about Ussie lacked class there. Surprised me. Disgusted me. If you support them and challenge Weatherald, you also disgust me. Cricket can do without that childish Qld stuff.

I watched the innings and did not see any nicks, I’m staggered by your bias. Extremely poor. To me, I loved the cover-drives, 4 reverse sweeps perfectly placed, and multiple pulls beating the leg-side trap.

Fully grown adult violently kicking away someone else’s property is ok, BUT a classy and calm response by Usman is deemed as ‘very weak leader’. The only weakness here is your bias Don.

Leave it at the crease pop a bushmans hanky into it then play a defense block on it with the ball and thats 5 runs isnt it? Umpire and Ussie should have acted earlier. That point on the field is where the action is

Ussie just had a stress free, almost agricultural slog (3 knicks and a french cut provided 16 of them). He didn't have any runs to chase and all day to do it because the umpires took Carey's innings and Hunt's innings out of play by staggeringly bad decisions. That would have added 150 to 200 more runs and the game ends in a draw. So you think the chirping, sledging silly leg and silly point are ok placing the helmet on the block hole, 7 times? You only saw the replay of it happening once. That's the issue, not whether you barrack for Qld or not.

As you have Kayo, you are qualified to answer 2 simple questions; How did Uzzy fare in the 2nd. Innings & what was the result of the game? By the way, I have been an avid follower of Sheffield Shield since mid 60’s. However I’m obviously not as knowledgeable as you! Go Queensland!

Honestly, what an absolute waste of time you must be on a cricket field. I'd never write up a player for throwing a piece of equipment and hitting no-one. Umpires looking desperately for a reason to throw their authority around are the worst kind of people. If a batsman did throw his helmet and hit a child, sure there would be consequences - for the batsman who threw his helmet! Not sure why you need to be involved in the first place.

The correct view is that the result of a shield game is meaningless and as such has no decisive point - the only purpose of them is to be a testbed for players who might go onto play test cricket. In that context, both hundreds from Labs and Head are vitally important, because both players are going to be playing in the test match in 2 weeks and have some form under their belt.

No, the correct view is that Head's century was made after the match had passed its decisive point. Who made the other ton and at what stage of the match was it made?

That is soooo you. We all know that kind of umpire. Get the cricket part wrong because you only studied the code of conduct.

Perhaps you could respond with your version of events...oh wait...you haven't got Kayo? You didn't watch it?At least you can shout your name, JOHN ALLAN.

Perhaps you could respond with your version of events...oh wait...you haven't got Kayo? You didn't watch it? At least you can shout your name, JOHN ALLAN.

“Feral mates”. “Carey denied Test opportunity”. Are you a comedian or stupid or perhaps both? Stick to topics you understand. Clown!

Or a more accurate view is only two batsmen were good enough to make centuries in that match and both will be playing in the first test.

“Feral mates”? “Carey denied a Test opportunity”? Are you a comedian, stupid or both? Stick to topics you actually understand. Then we probably wouldn’t hear from you. Clown!

Well actually come to think of it, a few months ago I reported a player, mainly for dissent, but included the hurling of his helmet as he was walking off in the report. I tend to look for as many clauses in the players’ code of conduct of our association as possible on the rare occasions I report someone simply because the written code of conduct and prescribed penalties talks a good game, but are often weak in application, due to a lack of will on the part of those appointed to any judiciary. If a batsman given out, showed dissent, and hurled his helmet when nearing the boundary and it hit an innocent passerby, say a small child walking by with their parents, then yeah I would imagine there would be implications of criminal negligence and reckless endangerment etc.