A Fined Gesture

Due to unforseen circumstances, (The pub’s TV was on the wrong channel) I missed most of the ODI between Australia and Sri Lanka on Sunday. Luckily, a venue change to a pub with numerous TVs meant that I got to catch the last over bowled by Chaminda Vaas. A good finish to what seemed like an otherwise uneventful game.

The post-match highlights were a little weird, though. Andy Symonds was given out, started to walk off, then came back to the crease. What the hell happened? Did the captain call him back? It’s been a long time since I’ve seen that in an international. In fact, I’ve never seen it.

What actually happened was even stranger. The umpire called Symonds back, after realising that his decision was a little, how do you say..Shithouse?

But seconds after raising his finger, doubt had spread across Manuel’s face. He consulted first with Billy Bowden, his eccentric but cool-headed partner, and then turned to Atapattu. “He told me that he believed that he had made a mistake and that he wanted to call Symonds (now over half way back to the pavilion) back. He asked me whether I would have a problem with that and I said no. It was obvious to us he [Symonds] had hit the ball and this is a game after all ? we have to look after its spirit. We were all happy with the decision.”

I don’t believe I’ve ever seen this in any game of cricket in any level. The usual attitude of the umpire is “It’s only a game, and I’m not going to admit I fucked up, so you are out. End of story.” It seemed that this Manuel was made of bigger stuff than most. Until today.

SRI LANKAN umpire Peter Manuel has dramatically charged Australian players Adam Gilchrist and Andrew Symonds with dissent for the protests that prompted him to change his mind in Sunday’s one-day game at Dambulla.

Gilchrist and Symonds will appear before match referee Mike Procter in Colombo tonight on misconduct charges for venting their frustration after Manuel’s flawed lbw decision against Symonds in the second one-day international between Australia and Sri Lanka.

I don’t understand his logic here. He made a shit decision, which Gilchrist and Symonds protested. He saw their point, and changed the decision. Now, even though he admitted they were right by reversing it, he is still going to bring them up on dissent?

On an unrelated note…Seeing as I didn’t watch the game, can someone give me an idea of what the thinking was behind demoting Gilchrist to 6 and opening with Clarke?

Explore posts in the same categories: Sport

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: