Is Ponting testing our intelligence?

Yesterday, Ricky Ponting mentioned that he is still open to the ‘catches pact’, whereby the batsmen should take the word of the fielder on dubious catches!

I can’t really understand it, does he think that Kumble is so naive that he’d actually get into such a pact with, of all the people, Ponting? It would be a good idea with someone like, say, Dan Vettori, who’s quite an honest dude but, Ponting? Isn’t this the same person who claimed a clear bump catch off Ganguly? Isn’t this the same guy whose team claimed an LBW against Dravid when the ball clearly came off his bat? I really don’t know whether to be angry or amused by the following quote he made at the press conference:

“Anil [Kumble] was the one who didn’t want that [a pact on trusting the fielder’s word] after the Sydney Test for one reason or the other,” Ponting said. “To me it’s like flogging the dead horse, to tell the truth. I go to every referee meeting before a series wanting to play the game like that, but almost every other captain in the world is not interested.”

Well, let me give you a clear message, Ponting, on behalf of all the cricket fans and captains out there:

“I think anyone would be pleased to have a catching pact with you because it’d make the jobs of those poor souls, the umpires, much more easier, and it makes the game much pleasant to play. However, it seems that you are living in a supernatural world where you seem to be the only person who thinks that your team is playing in the right spirit when no – one outside your country thinks so (actually, that lad Peter Roebuck doesn’t think too highly of you). Therefore, get your ass out of your bubble and face reality!”

Advertisement

Should Collingwood have revoked his appeal?

My apologies for not posting for nearly a week, I just started on my first job this week, and so I got a bit busy.

Ah, we have a violation of the often misunderstood ‘Spirit of Cricket’. If you haven’t seen it yet, just go to the link.

In a nutshell, Grant Elliott was called for a quick single by Kyle Mills, and Ryan Sidebottom, who was the bowler, ran across the pitch to get the ball to effect a run out, but in the process, collided against Elliott and both fell flat to the ground. Pietersen swoops in and throws the ball to Bell, who whips the bails off at the non – striker’s end.

But what followed was, indeed sensible stuff from the umpires, as Mark Benson asked Collingwood if he wanted to revoke the appeal. Collingwood denied the opportunity, and he was given out, to the utter disgust of Elliott and the NZ dressing room. Hats off to Mark Benson for not giving the decision immediately.

However, justice was served, and an overthrow gave NZ the game. The NZ boys were really pumped up, and many of them refused to give any handshakes.

Later, during the post-match conference, Collingwood apologised for the decision, saying it was done ‘in the heat of the moment’.

However, I’m not really convinced by this. Though a lot of pundits have applauded his humility, I would say that he may have known that it was against the ‘Spirit’ of the game, but decided that winning was of utmost importance. He may have decided that he would apologise regardless of the outcome.

This also doesn’t show well on the skipper, and also serves to grill down the view that today’s cricketers are ready to win at all costs, even if it means knocking down the stumps when the batsman had a genuine collision with a fielder.

However, former England skipper Nasser Hussain had something interesting to say about this. He says that the umpire should’ve gone over to Colly and told him ‘Look we have had a look at this upstairs; it has just been a genuine collision we are going to call a dead ball and get on with the game.’ It would’ve taken the heat out of the situation.

However, Collingwood has been banned for four matches for going behind the ‘over-rate’ twice in the past 12 months, which means he’d miss the last ODI against NZ, the ODI against Scotland, the T20 and the first ODI against South Africa.