2014 prospects

county and domestic cricket around the world

Re: 2014 prospects

Postby Alviro Patterson » Sat Jan 03, 2015 5:49 pm

Making_Splinters wrote:The rules are pretty clear, you're allowed to bowl until you are offically banned from bowling. Nothing to do with ethics, just a red herring.


"Reported" and "Suspicious" are operative words in this.

If ethics really came into it, then Worcestershire would not have signed Saeed Ajmal and his bowling action was more than questionable to say the least.
"Stats are there to be broken" Dominic Cork
"They took all our players away, banned our captain and we still came away with a ten-wicket victory" Jason Gillespie
"You won't get anywhere slouching about half out of bed" Geoffrey Boycott


2011-12 Oz vs India Tests FL guru | 2012-13 Oz vs SA Tests FL guru | 2012-13 Bang vs WI combined FL guru | 2013 Friends Life T20 FL guru | 2015 The Ashes FL guru | 2015 County Championship D2 FL guru | 2016 Womens WT20 FL guru| 2016 Eng v Pak Tests FL guru | 2017 Kia Super League FL guru | 2018 County Championship D2 FL guru
User avatar
Alviro Patterson
 
Posts: 17832
Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 6:07 pm
Location: North Cheshire
Team(s) Supported: Yorkshire CCC, Bradford City FC

Re: 2014 prospects

Postby Arthur Crabtree » Sat Jan 03, 2015 6:05 pm

Of course, but the fact that KW was charged is an additional factor.
I always say that everybody's right.
User avatar
Arthur Crabtree
 
Posts: 80417
Joined: Tue May 31, 2011 12:52 pm
Location: Nottingham
Team(s) Supported: Yorkshire.

Re: 2014 prospects

Postby sussexpob » Sat Jan 03, 2015 10:30 pm

westoelad wrote:There are clear rules and procedures in place for those with bowling actions which are considered suspect and it's the sole responsibity of the ruling authority to impose and monitor these actions. It is not in the remit of an individual club to rule on the legality of a bowler's action. For the club unitarily to prevent a bowler playing or bowling could constitute a restraint of trade and leave the club open to legal action.
Yorkshire, therefore, didn't do anything illegal-on the contrary they'd have been acting illegally if they'd have prevented him from bowling. Ever since I watched James Kirtley being interviewed after his successful comeback in that Lord's final I've always had sympathy for bowlers who are subject to such scrutiny. His relief was palpable and it was clear that he'd undergone a terrible ordeal.
That is why I believe these issues should be dealt with objectively and solely by the relevant authority -hence my initial response to a comment which I considered flippant.



Incredibly bizarre point being made here.

Restraint of Trade concerns the limitations or restrictions placed on a employee by the terms in their employment or service contract. Its completely irrelevant unless a player has a "must bowl every over" clause in their contract, which I can categorically state, has never happened.

You do realise that, by their very nature, sporting teams have a large squad to cover from injury, form, etc. You seem to be suggesting that 14 people in a squad of 25 can sue their club every week for restraint of trade, after all, surely picking someone else is stopping them from carrying out their trade? Do new ball bowlers being replaced by first change bowlers leave the field to speak to their lawyers? After all, they arent bowling anymore?

Actually not. If a player is not playing, they are STILL PAID THEIR CONTRACT WAGE AND THEREFORE ARE NOT BEING STOPPED IN MAKING MONEY FROM THERE TRADE.

That's aside from the laudable concept of "being innocent until proven guilty".



The concept comes with a key qualifier, the "until" part. Once proven guilty, his actions are no longer innocent, and are therefore punishable.

Another concept for you - "ignorance of the law or guilty action is no defence".

Yorkshire chose to bowl him and benefited as such from that action, therefore they cannot themselves claim innocence through ignorance.
2010 French Open fantasy league guru 2010 Wimbledon fantasy league guru 2014 Masters golf fantasy guru 2015 Players Championship FL Guru 2016 Masters Golf Fantasy Guru

And a hat and bra to you too, my good sirs!
sussexpob
 
Posts: 35322
Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2010 5:14 pm
Location: Asker, Norway
Team(s) Supported: Sussex and England Cricket, Vålerenga Fotball/FC Barcelona/Seagulls! ....
England and Norway at everything else

Re: 2014 prospects

Postby sussexpob » Sat Jan 03, 2015 10:30 pm

westoelad wrote:
Arthur Crabtree wrote:Williamson would have played as a batter anyway. I can't see that it was restraint of trade if they don't give him a bowl. I doubt even a specialist bowler being left out is illegal. It doesn't mean they've sacked him. I think it's fairly common for an organisation to suspend staff on pay while they investigate their conduct. It happens where I work.

It's up to everyone to make an ethical decision, no matter what the law allows. That includes Yorks and KW. Don't people routinely make decisions based on what they think is right, rather than what is allowed?

That's a valid point regarding suspending staff but in Williamson' s case one assumes the ECB were the ruling body who decided he could bowl in this particular tournament. As such it's not for Yorkshire to overrule the relevant ruling body. My argument is that this is a sensitive issue best left to the ruling body to decide.



Thats like saying, its ok to cheat if it goes unnoticed.
2010 French Open fantasy league guru 2010 Wimbledon fantasy league guru 2014 Masters golf fantasy guru 2015 Players Championship FL Guru 2016 Masters Golf Fantasy Guru

And a hat and bra to you too, my good sirs!
sussexpob
 
Posts: 35322
Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2010 5:14 pm
Location: Asker, Norway
Team(s) Supported: Sussex and England Cricket, Vålerenga Fotball/FC Barcelona/Seagulls! ....
England and Norway at everything else

Re: 2014 prospects

Postby Making_Splinters » Sat Jan 03, 2015 10:32 pm

I don't really understand Sussex's point to be honest. As far as I am aware, Yorkshire did not bowl Williamson when he was banned from bowling internationally. I may be mistaken.
"It was my opinion it is up to me if I want to justify it or not" - Bhaveshgor
User avatar
Making_Splinters
 
Posts: 10183
Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2010 2:44 pm
Location: Manchester, England
Team(s) Supported: Cricket - Lancshire , England
Rugby - Sale , England

Re: 2014 prospects

Postby SaintPowelly » Sat Jan 03, 2015 10:38 pm

Making_Splinters wrote:I don't really understand Sussex's point to be honest. As far as I am aware, Yorkshire did not bowl Williamson when he was banned from bowling internationally. I may be mistaken.


They bowled him AFTER he was called for chucking, but before he had been tested ( or while awaiting results from tests )
Bang-NZ ODI prediction guru
India vs Oz ODI fantasy league 2013
SA-WI Tests fantasy league 2015
Sheffield Shield fantasy league 2014-2015
SaintPowelly
 
Posts: 18527
Joined: Fri Mar 26, 2010 5:54 pm
Team(s) Supported: Hampshire Cricket, Southampton Football

Re: 2014 prospects

Postby Making_Splinters » Sat Jan 03, 2015 10:42 pm

SaintPowelly wrote:
Making_Splinters wrote:I don't really understand Sussex's point to be honest. As far as I am aware, Yorkshire did not bowl Williamson when he was banned from bowling internationally. I may be mistaken.


They bowled him AFTER he was called for chucking, but before he had been tested ( or while awaiting results from tests )


So, Yorkshire did nothing wrong. A player is allowed to bowl while they await testing.

If there is any blame to be laid it is at the feet of the umpires who did not no ball him while playing for Yorkshire. Same could be said for Ajmal who when tested was a long way past the limit but sent down over 400 overs unquestioned.

Clearly there needs to be more training provided for umpires.
"It was my opinion it is up to me if I want to justify it or not" - Bhaveshgor
User avatar
Making_Splinters
 
Posts: 10183
Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2010 2:44 pm
Location: Manchester, England
Team(s) Supported: Cricket - Lancshire , England
Rugby - Sale , England

Re: 2014 prospects

Postby sussexpob » Sat Jan 03, 2015 10:42 pm

Arthur Crabtree wrote:Williamson would have played as a batter anyway. I can't see that it was restraint of trade if they don't give him a bowl. I doubt even a specialist bowler being left out is illegal. It doesn't mean they've sacked him. I think it's fairly common for an organisation to suspend staff on pay while they investigate their conduct. It happens where I work.

It's up to everyone to make an ethical decision, no matter what the law allows. That includes Yorks and KW. Don't people routinely make decisions based on what they think is right, rather than what is allowed?



Tony Pickersgill is a coach at Yorkshire whos job it is to video players with "unusual actions" through all tiers of Yorkshire cricket, and rehabilitate them. Before Williamson was suspended by the ICC, he had an interview inside which he commented that;

“It’s only occasionally that his arm does tend to bend a little bit. I think that can be rectified......I think the lad is a part-time bowler, like Adam Lyth, who’s bowled a handful of overs yet there’s all this hoo-ha about his action. I’m sure he’ll take it all in his stride and endeavour to try to get his arm a little bit straighter.”



Its clear to me, therefore, and to Yorkshire fans (and their specialist coach) that he was throwing. It was clear to the ICC too.... If you think it right that a player is played even though under testing at his own county, a coach has flagged his arm is not straight enough, why should a county be givne the benefit of the doubt when it subsquently is proved he is bowling illegally?

This is knowingly breaking the rules, when it is found out or stopped is irrelevant, the punishment should apply to all matches he was expected to have played in, and include all those parties that willingly picked and benefited from it.
2010 French Open fantasy league guru 2010 Wimbledon fantasy league guru 2014 Masters golf fantasy guru 2015 Players Championship FL Guru 2016 Masters Golf Fantasy Guru

And a hat and bra to you too, my good sirs!
sussexpob
 
Posts: 35322
Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2010 5:14 pm
Location: Asker, Norway
Team(s) Supported: Sussex and England Cricket, Vålerenga Fotball/FC Barcelona/Seagulls! ....
England and Norway at everything else

Re: 2014 prospects

Postby Arthur Crabtree » Sat Jan 03, 2015 10:49 pm

Umpires aren't allowed to call bowlers any more Splinters. At professional level anyway. They have to include it in their report.

For me, your view of what constitutes fair play is too narrow. I'm not really claiming he has broken any rules.
I always say that everybody's right.
User avatar
Arthur Crabtree
 
Posts: 80417
Joined: Tue May 31, 2011 12:52 pm
Location: Nottingham
Team(s) Supported: Yorkshire.

Re: 2014 prospects

Postby SaintPowelly » Sat Jan 03, 2015 10:52 pm

Making_Splinters wrote:
SaintPowelly wrote:
Making_Splinters wrote:I don't really understand Sussex's point to be honest. As far as I am aware, Yorkshire did not bowl Williamson when he was banned from bowling internationally. I may be mistaken.


They bowled him AFTER he was called for chucking, but before he had been tested ( or while awaiting results from tests )


So, Yorkshire did nothing wrong. A player is allowed to bowl while they await testing.

If there is any blame to be laid it is at the feet of the umpires who did not no ball him while playing for Yorkshire. Same could be said for Ajmal who when tested was a long way past the limit but sent down over 400 overs unquestioned.

Clearly there needs to be more training provided for umpires.


I'm on the fence, I see both sides. Yorkshire may not have broken any rules, but its not exactly in the spirit of the game.
Bang-NZ ODI prediction guru
India vs Oz ODI fantasy league 2013
SA-WI Tests fantasy league 2015
Sheffield Shield fantasy league 2014-2015
SaintPowelly
 
Posts: 18527
Joined: Fri Mar 26, 2010 5:54 pm
Team(s) Supported: Hampshire Cricket, Southampton Football

Re: 2014 prospects

Postby sussexpob » Sat Jan 03, 2015 10:52 pm

SaintPowelly wrote:
Making_Splinters wrote:
SaintPowelly wrote:
Making_Splinters wrote:I don't really understand Sussex's point to be honest. As far as I am aware, Yorkshire did not bowl Williamson when he was banned from bowling internationally. I may be mistaken.


They bowled him AFTER he was called for chucking, but before he had been tested ( or while awaiting results from tests )


So, Yorkshire did nothing wrong. A player is allowed to bowl while they await testing.

If there is any blame to be laid it is at the feet of the umpires who did not no ball him while playing for Yorkshire. Same could be said for Ajmal who when tested was a long way past the limit but sent down over 400 overs unquestioned.

Clearly there needs to be more training provided for umpires.


I'm on the fence, I see both sides. Yorkshire may not have broken any rules, but its not exactly in the spirit of the game.


Isnt keeping spirit of the game a rule?
2010 French Open fantasy league guru 2010 Wimbledon fantasy league guru 2014 Masters golf fantasy guru 2015 Players Championship FL Guru 2016 Masters Golf Fantasy Guru

And a hat and bra to you too, my good sirs!
sussexpob
 
Posts: 35322
Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2010 5:14 pm
Location: Asker, Norway
Team(s) Supported: Sussex and England Cricket, Vålerenga Fotball/FC Barcelona/Seagulls! ....
England and Norway at everything else

Re: 2014 prospects

Postby Arthur Crabtree » Sat Jan 03, 2015 10:52 pm

I agree with Sussex here. There were widespread concerns over KW throughout the game. He thought his action wasn't good. The club knew there were problems. And the ICC had taken very serious action against him.

I think this is a matter of individual judgment. But in my view, Yorkshire got it wrong.
I always say that everybody's right.
User avatar
Arthur Crabtree
 
Posts: 80417
Joined: Tue May 31, 2011 12:52 pm
Location: Nottingham
Team(s) Supported: Yorkshire.

Re: 2014 prospects

Postby sussexpob » Sat Jan 03, 2015 10:58 pm

Arthur Crabtree wrote:I agree with Sussex here. There were widespread concerns over KW throughout the game. He thought his action wasn't good. The club knew there were problems. And the ICC had taken very serious action against him.

I think this is a matter of individual judgment. But in my view, Yorkshire got it wrong.


I think you just have to read some of the Yorkshire fans boards when it happened, the tone is very much "well, that finally happened, how did it take so long"??

I mean, I would find it seriously hard for anyone to tell me they watched him bowl and thought it was legitimate?
2010 French Open fantasy league guru 2010 Wimbledon fantasy league guru 2014 Masters golf fantasy guru 2015 Players Championship FL Guru 2016 Masters Golf Fantasy Guru

And a hat and bra to you too, my good sirs!
sussexpob
 
Posts: 35322
Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2010 5:14 pm
Location: Asker, Norway
Team(s) Supported: Sussex and England Cricket, Vålerenga Fotball/FC Barcelona/Seagulls! ....
England and Norway at everything else

Re: 2014 prospects

Postby SaintPowelly » Sat Jan 03, 2015 10:58 pm

sussexpob wrote:
SaintPowelly wrote:
Making_Splinters wrote:
SaintPowelly wrote:
Making_Splinters wrote:I don't really understand Sussex's point to be honest. As far as I am aware, Yorkshire did not bowl Williamson when he was banned from bowling internationally. I may be mistaken.


They bowled him AFTER he was called for chucking, but before he had been tested ( or while awaiting results from tests )


So, Yorkshire did nothing wrong. A player is allowed to bowl while they await testing.

If there is any blame to be laid it is at the feet of the umpires who did not no ball him while playing for Yorkshire. Same could be said for Ajmal who when tested was a long way past the limit but sent down over 400 overs unquestioned.

Clearly there needs to be more training provided for umpires.


I'm on the fence, I see both sides. Yorkshire may not have broken any rules, but its not exactly in the spirit of the game.


Isnt keeping spirit of the game a rule?


I view it similarly to Collingwood running out Grant Elliott in the Eng-NZ ODI ( after Elliott collided with Sidebottom ), the rules allowed him to do it, but it makes him a pr*ck for doing so.
Bang-NZ ODI prediction guru
India vs Oz ODI fantasy league 2013
SA-WI Tests fantasy league 2015
Sheffield Shield fantasy league 2014-2015
SaintPowelly
 
Posts: 18527
Joined: Fri Mar 26, 2010 5:54 pm
Team(s) Supported: Hampshire Cricket, Southampton Football

Re: 2014 prospects

Postby Arthur Crabtree » Sat Jan 03, 2015 11:03 pm

Notable how little bowling he is doing post rehab.

Colly regrets that run out. But, too late now.
I always say that everybody's right.
User avatar
Arthur Crabtree
 
Posts: 80417
Joined: Tue May 31, 2011 12:52 pm
Location: Nottingham
Team(s) Supported: Yorkshire.

PreviousNext

Return to Domestic Cricket

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: captaincolly and 20 guests