Question of the week: Do you walk?
No links of interest this week (you can send any you find to me on links@harrowdrive.com by the way) so a question instead.
Cricket writer and commentator Christopher Martin-Jenkins reckons cricket would be a lot better off if batsmen walked when they think they are out. Do you agree?
"The life of the umpires at every level of the game would be immeasurably easier, if it were to become once more the inviolable custom of every cricketer to walk to the pavilion the moment that he knows beyond doubt that he is out."That is the way I was taught to play cricket. I believe it to be in the true spirit of the game and that what one might call the Southern Hemisphere view - that the umpire is there to decide if a batsman is out or not - is rubbish and has been responsible for a demeaning of that spirit. I give you simple evidence. When a batsman is bowled; he walks; when a batsman hits the ball in the air to mid-off and is caught; he walks. When a batsman snicks Monty Panesar to slip via the wicket-keeper's glove and is caught by slip; he walks. But when a batsman snicks it into the keeper's gloves only - and not into a fielder's hands - he doesn't walk - in the hope that the umpire might not be certain. Again, when he snicks it off the inside edge via his pad to short leg and is caught, generally speaking these days, he doesn't walk either, for the same reason. Where is the logic, or the honour in that?
"Cricket would instantly become a better game if young cricketers in every country were to be taught from now onwards that walking is the right thing to do when they know they are genuinely out. Most wickets fall, after all, to catches. Essentially it would reduce the umpires' contentious decision-making to lbws, run-outs, stumpings and those rare occasions when it is not clear whether or not a fair catch has been made."
I'm inclined to think that edges behind are slightly different to other modes of dismissal. Mainly because everyone appeals at the slightest chance. This is equally unfair if you don't think it's out but appeal anyway.
I'd still like to see a return to the days of walking though. You know as a batsman if you have hit it or not most times. The times you genuinely don't know then stand your ground, but if you know you have hit it then treat it the same as being bowled.
There is an argument that umpires make mistakes particularly at club level. You will be given several dodgy caught behind and lbw decisions in your life so why not take your chance and wait for a bad decision to go your way. I can see the attraction of that idea too.
So what do you think? To walk or let the umpire decide? Leave a comment with your views.
- Login to post comments
Comments
I too am a great believer in walking, though one does sometimes get bitten. I walked after a snick behind in a recent match, only to be told later that I had actually edged the ball into the ground before the keeper took it. I didn't see it but I am pretty sure the keeper must have. It would have been nice to have been called back....
That's rotten luck Andy.
I think walkers will generally get the rough end of the stick as they get both the bad lbw/caught behind decisions and they walk when they ARE out. Of course, if you are known as a walker you could always stand your ground once or twice a season and not be given out...
I think walking is the moral thing to do although if the other team lies about catching it like it happened to you Andy then you start thinking why should I walk if others arn't honest. As most cricket matches don't have the benefit of tv replay than it's really hard to choose to walk or not.
Do you walk then Danny? As a general rule I mean.
Well I think my reaction gives it away regardless
I'm more of a bowler so it's frustrating when you know you have a wicket and the umpire misses it and the batsmen stands there grinning at you. As a general rule I think I would probably walk but it is hard to say as there are many different situations to be placed in
Btw David, I had no idea you could leave comments like this. Possibly mention it in the forum so others are clued in and possibly create more of a discussion.
Cheers
I do think it's a unique situation. Not as simple as LBW (always let the umpire decide) or bowled. The trouble is there is a lot more scope to stand there when you know you are out.
I try to make it as fair as possible.When i know i knicked it I will walk(im from the southern hemisphere too).
But it happend once when i hit the ground and edged it to first slip simultaneously and I genuinely thought i only hit the ground.I never look back so i didnt know it was in slips hands.I REALLY GOT IT FROM THEM when the ump stuck me.
I think it should be the same with boundry fielding going to third umpire.The player should just say 4 or not,as well as fair catches.He would have tolive with being a cheat.