PDA

View Full Version : Vaughan says no


Cameron_K
20 Jul 2005, 17:20
AUSTRALIA captain Ricky Ponting's proposal for Ashes series batsmen to accept the word of fielders on contentious catches has been rejected by England's Michael Vaughan.

Vaughan has made it clear he wants decisions left to umpires.

Disappointed, Ponting planned to raise the matter again during the pre-series meeting with match referee Ranjan Madugalle on the eve of the first Test starting at Lord's tomorrow.

But Vaughan, who famously stood his ground in Adelaide in 2002-2003 despite Australia's belief Justin Langer had caught him at point, indicated he would not change his stance.

He wants decisions left out of players' hands.

"Umpires are there. They have done a really good job over the past couple of years of making the decision out in the middle," Vaughan said.

"I don't know where we've had any instances where the actual TV replay people have come into play, as the umpire asks the player if he caught it and if he says yes, then yes, that's out.

"I hope that continues."

Vaughan raised Australia's ire during the second Test of the past Ashes series, when he did not accept Langer's word the catch had carried.

Vaughan, on 19 at the time, was given not out and went on to make 177.

But Vaughan said disputed catches had not been an issue during his two years of captaincy.

"Every time a player has said 'It's gone in my hands', the umpire's gone 'That's out'," he said.

"Every time a player's (said) he's not too sure, the umpire's said not out.

"We haven't had any incidents and we don't really see it as an issue to bring up."

Ponting received a similar rejection from New Zealand captain Stephen Fleming last November before the trans-Tasman Test but remained confident he was on the right track.

"I'm one that wants to push it as much as I can because I think it's a bit of a blight on the game that we refer them all to the third umpire," Ponting said.

Didn't Eddie say that is was the Aussies who stuck around when players had said they caught the ball.

ManWithNoName
20 Jul 2005, 17:23
Well Vaughanie, you've shown yourself to be a pathetic captain as well as a pathetic player.

cschreuder61
20 Jul 2005, 17:28
Should have accepted it. Trying to look tough IMO. Isn't working.

Cooldude
20 Jul 2005, 18:55
No surprise

The proposal was brought up before the tri-series even started, Vaughan wanted nothing with it then

This England team thinks they're gonna play it tough, no nice-guy stuff, they have been like that for a year now, but unfortunately just like Steve Waugh did, they'll lose sight of the good of the game and damage it in the process.

And the Aussies will still beat them, taking the fielders' word for it or not

embleygirl
20 Jul 2005, 19:31
Where was this tough England against South Africa? They lost 4-1.
Australia will clobber them.

dogs105
20 Jul 2005, 19:39
Where was this tough England against South Africa? They lost 4-1.
Australia will clobber them.


In what form of the game?

embleygirl
20 Jul 2005, 19:45
Ah, sorry my mistake. Jumped the gun a bit and remembered the ODI's.

apollo_creed
20 Jul 2005, 20:41
I just want good, hard close cricket. And everyone except Brett Lee to do well.

Jaymin
20 Jul 2005, 20:46
No wonder Vaughan doesn't want to rely on fielders words. If he had of taken Langers word in Adeladie his Test average would be halved.

He's proving that its all personal gain for him and doesn't care about the good of the game.

Hope it comes back to bite him.

dogs105
20 Jul 2005, 21:01
No wonder Vaughan doesn't want to rely on fielders words. If he had of taken Langers word in Adeladie his Test average would be halved.

He's proving that its all personal gain for him and doesn't care about the good of the game.

Hope it comes back to bite him.

After the Umpires took Pieterson's word on the two that he grassed in the one-dayers. ;)

dan warna
20 Jul 2005, 21:57
mmm

anyone remember slaters four bounces and in my hand catch?

I don't think anyone would take his word even if it came with a signed bank cheque... :D

or for that matter hansie cronje's or mohammad azzarudhins for other reasons :D

Rhombus
20 Jul 2005, 22:07
I think the batsman has every right to stand his ground if he believes there's doubt.
The Third umpire will eventually decide which decision is correct regardless.
This is obviously fairly subjective so if he walks he walks if he chooses not to then that's OK by me.

weevil
20 Jul 2005, 22:42
I’d prefer to trust the word of the fielder, takes the game to a higher level.

But that said, I think leave it up to the umpire is a fair enough call also.

I agree with CD, I think this more of a political move from the big V than anything else. He wants to be the hard man.

eddiesmith
20 Jul 2005, 22:51
I would not trust half the Australian team so good on him

Eagles_09
20 Jul 2005, 22:55
I actually agree with Vaughan on this occasion, the umpires are there for a reason and they should do there job, and please dont tell me all of the australian players take the words of opposition about catches............

Cameron_K
20 Jul 2005, 22:59
I actually agree with Vaughan on this occasion, the umpires are there for a reason and they should do there job, and please dont tell me all of the australian players take the words of opposition about catches............

They have in the series in which it was agreed to.

Unwritten_Law
21 Jul 2005, 00:50
The Third umpire will eventually decide which decision is correct regardless.


Not out is ALWAYS the decision.