Is Ian Bell a cheat?

[outabounds]

I say yes- He knew he touched the ball and used the referral system in the hope of getting out of it- and he did. Disgraceful stuff. Poor form old chap.

 

[Higs]

Any of our batsmen would have done it if gave us a chance to win the match. Blame the system, not the player.

 

[outabounds]

Any of our batsmen would have done it if gave us a chance to win the match. Blame the system, not the player.

Sounds like you agree with me then

 

[Hellgood]

I say yes- He knew he touched the ball and used the referral system in the hope of getting out of it- and he did. Disgraceful stuff. Poor form old chap.

I didn't like what just happened, but lets get over it. Even if he is out we are still going to lose the test, maybe Steve Smith should have held onto the catch?

Bell probably knew he hit it, but didn't walk. Maybe reduce the amount of referrals to one per innings and the batsman won't do this unless they are absolutely certain that they are not out.

 

[vandammer]

I say yes- He knew he touched the ball and used the referral system in the hope of getting out of it- and he did. Disgraceful stuff. Poor form old chap.

How can he be a cheat if what he did is within the rules of the game?

 

[skipper kelly]

Supporters and the media are only getting what they asked for. Its bloody hilarious.

 

[outabounds]

How can he be a cheat if what he did is within the rules of the game?

If you hit the ball and are given out, are you not cheating the system by asking for a referral in the hope that their will be no evidence?

 

[Higs]

Sounds like you agree with me then

Ok I'll put it more simply for you, No Ian Bell is not a cheat.

 

[outabounds]

Supporters and the media are only getting what they asked for. Its bloody hilarious.

I didn't ask for this- I think it is ridiculous and it has changed the game. For example- all day they have been comparing Cook to Hammond, Hobbs etc but it is quite conceivable that he would have only made half the runs that they did without this system.

 

[Father Jack]

dubious sportsmanship, but that's all.

 

[GoldenSky]

Nope, not a cheat.

How can he be a cheat if what he did is within the rules of the game?

LOL, good call.

 

[outabounds]

dubious sportsmanship, but that's all.

Yeh, your probably right- it just makes me angry.

 

[Partridge]

If you hit the ball and are given out, are you not cheating the system by asking for a referral in the hope that their will be no evidence?

Nope. You put a rule in place and players are going to take advantage of it. That's what they've done for 143 years and will continue to do. I suspect if Steve Waugh had done it it would be trumpeted as being hard-nosed and relentless.

 

[skipper kelly]

I didn't ask for this- I think it is ridiculous and it has changed the game. For example- all day they have been comparing Cook to Hammond, Hobbs etc but it is quite conceivable that he would have only made half the runs that they did without this system.

I didn't either, but the over analysis of umpiring decisions by supporters, past players and the media is the cause. I find it laughable that these will be the same people whinging about the Bell decision.

 

[alfy!]

No, hell no. Literally no one walks these days.

 

[Knight Ryders]

I'm livid but not really at Bell but Dar. FFS man, have some balls.

A question though, why didn't the third umpire view the ball as normal instead of all slow-mo? Could have Dar asked him to do this? Clear as day at normal speed that he knicked it.

 

[skipper kelly]

No, hell no. Literally no one walks these days.

Cook would have walked I reckon.

 

[SebastianVettel]

No, hell no. Literally no one walks these days.

Well it's not really an issue of 'walking' as such. He knew he hit the ball and the umpire gave him out, and he appealed on the off chance he could rort a dodgy system.

Spose it depends how you define cheating, but it's very dubious sportsmanship at best.

All great sides/sportsman have these sort of dubious unsportsmanlike qualities, maybe it's something England are looking to instill.

I'd be pretty disappointed if someone from my team went down this road, but that's his decision and he made a hundred out of it, so, well....... I suppose it's worked for him.

 

[outabounds]

Well it's not really an issue of 'walking' as such. He knew he hit the ball and the umpire gave him out, and he appealed on the off chance he could rort a dodgy system.

Spose it depends how you define cheating, but it's very dubious sportsmanship at best.

All great sides/sportsman have these sort of dubious unsportsmanlike qualities, maybe it's something England are looking to instill.

I'd be pretty disappointed if someone from my team went down this road, but that's his decision and he made a hundred out of it, so, well....... I suppose it's worked for him.

Well summed up

 

[Kim Hagdorn]

I'm livid but not really at Bell but Dar. FFS man, have some balls.

Bell is a knob but that's exactly right, calling him a cheat is a bit much.

 

[Jimpson]

How do people know he hit the ball? He might have felt he didnt hit it but was asking Prior if he thought there would be enough evidence to overturn the decision.

I'd wait to hear what he has to say first before judging his guilt

 

[Gough]

I thought Phil Hughes claiming that 'catch ' was a lot worse. He should have a word to Greg Dyer about what happens to your career when you start doing that sort of thing.

 

[red+black]

I'll go with a definite no.

There's a system in place and he's allowed to use it. What if it was a no-ball? I've seen the West Indies reserve their appeals for Gayle and Chanderpaul, even if there was no real justification to refer a decision.

If you're 7 or 8 down in the final session of a Test, facing defeat, you should be referring decisions.

Just like in tennis. If you have a challenge or two remaining, say during a tie-break, use it. You may be fairly sure you're wrong, but why let the challenge go to waste.

I don't like batsmen walking. Batsmen are there to make runs, bowlers to get them out, umpires to make the decisions.

 

[Plugger35]

I'll go with a definite no.

There's a system in place and he's allowed to use it. What if it was a no-ball? I've seen the West Indies reserve their appeals for Gayle and Chanderpaul, even if there was no real justification to refer a decision.

If you're 7 or 8 down in the final session of a Test, facing defeat, you should be referring decisions.

Just like in tennis. If you have a challenge or two remaining, say during a tie-break, use it. You may be fairly sure you're wrong, but why let the challenge go to waste.

I don't like batsmen walking. Batsmen are there to make runs, bowlers to get them out, umpires to make the decisions.

Yeah if you have referrals up your sleeve then you may as well use them, especially if it's one of your key batsmen or at a crucial time in the match. Even if there is only a slight chance of getting it overturned it is worth a try rather than letting the referrals go to waste.

Bell probably would have been criticised by the England team and their supporters if he didn't refer it and the replay showed no nick on hotspot.

 

[fairdinkum]

No he is not.

Glad to see that this thread isn't full of some of the same utter garbage which was posted in the gameday thread, though. Even some of the better posters (IMO) on this board posting some pretty laughable stuff, such as 'Bell has no integrity' etc.

Bell had two referrals left. He used one. It came back in his favour. Completely within the rules. Just ask Watson, who has used a referral almost every time he has gotten out.

Bad sportsmanship? Dunno. Ask the Aussies of the Waugh/earlier Ponting era, who were the best (and often longest) appealers in the game, back when there were no referrals to save the beleaguered batsmen who felt the wrath of the intimidated umpire.

As for the referral system, the best post on the matter in the gameday thread:

You prefer the raft of poor decisions we have in the South Africa v India Series right now, or a repeat of the Test against India a few years ago. That one was an umpiring farce. Review system's been very good this series, even if it itself made a howler with Bell. I'd prefer one howler, compared to a number of them.