"England Should Apologise To Australia!" Aussie Journalist SLAMS English Cricket
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 4 июл 2023
- Piers Morgan Uncensored is joined by Australian cricket writer and journalist Peter Lalor to react and discuss the controversial stumping of Jonny Bairstow which led to Australia winning the Ashes over England.
Piers believes Australian captain Pat Cummins is the person at fault as he believes he should have spoken with the umpire to reverse the decision. Peter however believes that Australia are owed an apology by English cricket fans over the way the team has been treated online and more so at Lord's by MCC members who hurled insults at the team as they walked in.
Subscribe to stay up-to-date on all Uncensored content.
Follow Piers Morgan Uncensored on:
Twitter: / piersuncensored
Instagram: / piersmorgan. .
Facebook: / piersmorganu. .
TikTok: / piersmorganun. .
Follow Piers Morgan on:
Twitter: / piersmorgan
Instagram: / piersmorgan
Piers Morgan Uncensored is now available on TalkTV, Fox Nation and Sky News Australia!
#piersmorgan #cricket #ashes #englandcricket #australiacricket #debate #talktv 
Развлечения
“It's within the rules of the game and that's how it is,” - Jonny Bairstow 2014
Did he say that when he sneakily stumped Patel in a County match?
@@acerimmehhis exact words made on tv when interviewed about it 😂 all this old footage coming back to haunt him
Hahaha yeah,maybe that's why old Jonny boy has been conspicuously quiet on this matter hey haha 😄
@@acerimmeh Yes, he actually stood holding the ball waiting for Patel's foot to clear the crease. Bit of a difference.
@@Bellas1717 Stumping players on the edge of their crease overbalancing has always been part of the game. Australians bringing up these false equivalencies, pointing out times Bairstow attempted regulation stumpings to justify their far from regulation ‘stumping’ of a player going for a between overs chat is disingenuous at best.
I'm an Englishman, furiously passionate about The Ashes and fair play. I wholeheartedly agree with Peter Lalor. We can't be pointing fingers with a ton of whatabouts out there. I even agree about England apologising, in my view because we've prioritized Bazball over The Ashes, and show respect for the folks who have travelled so far for the contest. We should thank Australia for a timely slap around the face whilst we have a chance to do something about getting a win on the board in Leeds. Sorry to hear about Steve Smith's mum. It's not on that this has happened to her. Finally, the comment about the Englsh writing the laws: Ouch. That hurt, and good one. Proud Pom, no whinger though.
Australian fan and appreciate your level-headedness. Personally, I don't like these gotcha kinds of wickets - Mankads and sneaky keeper underarms. I'd rather see batsmen dismissed by high quality bowling or fielding. But clearly these dismissals are within the law and they are occasionally needed as as a reminder to batsmen that (a) the creases are there for a reason, and (b) they don't determine whether the ball is live or dead. I can guarantee Bairstow will never take that for granted and get out that way again, and it'll be a wake-up call for a few others too. As for the 'spirit of cricket', it's outlined in the preamble to the Laws of Cricket and says nothing about captains being so generous as to hand dozy opposition batsmen a second chance.
Fawning submissive.
Dude.
He was batting in his crease.
He marked his crease.
Both umpires where on the move.
One umpire unclipping the bowlers cap.
Oh but the ball wasn’t dead?
It was sneaky and crooked.
Was JB gaining an advantage?
NO.
A batsman batting 3 yards out for his crease would be gaining an advantage.
A batsman running down the wicket to a spinner would be gaining an advantage.
The batsman at the non strikers end backing up to early before the bowler has released the ball would be gaining an advantage.
JB wasn’t the whole thing stinks, same old Aussies always cheating theyve got previous this lot, a disgusting bunch.
@@Doghead.89 do you have a life to get on with?
@@Doghead.89and yet when England has done it in the past, no one in England said anything.
So Bairstow is calling when the over is over? Well we don’t need umpires anymore do we.
😂
We could even go back to "Over the fence is 6 & out"
Actually, as an Australian, my feelings are this: if an Australian batsman got himself out in the same fashion, I reckon I'd be feeling anger towards the batsman for his negligence. I really don't think I'd be blaming the fielding side.
Considering the massive Australian over-reaction to the Starc non-catch the day before (crowding the umpires, blaming Duckett for not walking) I highly doubt that your compatriots would feel the same way! Also, Australians were wandering out of their crease throughout both of their innings without positive confirmation the ball was dead, which I guess just means that they all must be negligent also, or was Bairstow only negligent because he did it against Australia, a team known to be unsporting?
Of course you’d say that.
Not a chance mate... This will be on the headlines, just as its been portraited in the English newspapers.. They will definitely talk about lack of spirit for the game and they will also be called cheats, BY EVERYBODY IN AUSTRALIA MATE... Lets be honest, nobody talks highly of The Australian spirits for the game.. I can only think of Adam Gilchrist when it comes to Australian spirit of the game. I mean who would thought of sandpaper and how long did that happen before its been caught? How many test matches and odis been played that way? Guess nobody will know that now but yeh.. Australians would react the same way if the tables were turned.
Yep!
@@user-mk5io6yt9c😂😂😂😂 you're wanker of a captain has tried it multiple times champ. Get over it your team just aren't good enough.
As an Englishman, Piers you are an embarrassment and get over it, the ball was not dead and it is not a dead ball when the batsman scrapes his boot or studs to mark the end of the delivery, its up to the umpire, Aussies played within the rules and so why should Cummins have to withdraw the appeal, it is not cheating so no tarnished reputations, MCC members should definitely apologise to the Australians
Writing as a MCC member and lifelong cricketer, Piers you would be well served to read the rules of cricket before spouting a stream of inaccurate consciousness.
I’m Australian and I think we are the pathetic ones, to try and justify this shows what and immature and desperate people we are.
Nobody believes that the batter was trying to steal a run.
Why try to somehow get a wicket that you haven't earned.
Even in Mankading, the accusation is that the batter is trying to get an advantage, which is not the case here.
@@todddixon1005 my brother bairstowe attempted the exact same dismissal
Are you an English Cricket fan, though? It doesn't sound like you are.
What i've noticed about Piers is, when he is confident that he is absolutely right, he lets his guest speak without interrupting. As soon as the guest starts building a valid argument, he just jumps in and interrupts them every three seconds. Pathetic, really. It's easy to be a bully when you are in command of the mute button.
The spirit of the game is to applaud your opponent, even when you'd want to tear his guts out and feed them to the dogs. It is in the spirit of the game to accept the umpires' decision, even when you are 100% certain that they are wrong. Like the day before, re Starc's (non) catch... It is not in the spirit of the game to announce that you won't be having a beer with your opponent any time soon. As if they'd be crying to miss that opportunity (it's most likely they'd be saying DILLIGAF.)
i totally agree. If you want to debate someone then you should allow them to respond freely. Unfortunately Piers Morgan is the epitome of a whinging Pom. As an Aussie I watched Stokes batting and had a terrible feeling that this bloke is going to pull the rabbit from its hiding place again. However as an Australian I also appreciated his display of trying to win the game. This is how England should be.
Yup, the umpire is always right, even when they're wrong.
Pretty crook when they have to go back to the Trevor Chappell issue, and that was against the Kiwis. The laws have changed since that. And Sandgate, after Smith scored on of the best centuries in recent history?
Has anyone read his continual tirade on Twitter I blocked him in the end he was whinging for 36 hours 😂😂
Piers is a horrible person
I am Englishman, was a wickie for 27 years, and in every form of cricket I played, catching a batsman walking out out of his crease was a 'given' part of the role, actively coached, and I did it about a dozen times. Not one batsman complained it was unsportsman-like conduct, no opposition player ever pulled me to one side about it, and every batsman I caught out was gutted they were mugged for not paying attention. The ball was still live, the over was still live, and the wicketkeeper was aware enough to be proactive and switched on to seize the opportunity. If the ball had missed and gone for 4 overthrows none of you idiots would be whining!? Piers needs to shut-up!!
Thank you dude. Restored my faith in the English!!!.. now please go and spread the word .. Ben stokes nearly pulled off a miracle and everyone's focused on a legitimate piece of cricket play and likening it to sandpaper-gate and cheating.. I'm actually really disappointed in your entire country ATM and I'm honestly looking at this as objectively as possible..
Well said but many suspect that this is not about the 'incident' itself, its about drawing attention away from the failures of 'bazball'.
Very true. But the answer to this conundrum is that the umpires should be empowered (and educated) to over-rule the laws of cricket on certain rare occasions to 'protect the integrity of the sport'. As an Aussie, I believe Bairstow should have been given a reprieve by the umpires. It's the umpires who have failed not Cummins or Carey who did the right thing. Gutless umpiring has caused this controversy.
@@michaellincoln3739 i actually agree with u here because u can't blame Carey or Cummins and it's a shit way to get someone out or to get out.. I was thinking the exact same way, the umpires have all the angles and all the cameras so it's all up to them.. then I realized that giving him a reprieve here will set a precedent where umpires are now having to decide if a batsmen is being careless or made a mistake.. the rules are the way they are so umpires don't have to make these decisions.. therefore I revert back to it being entirely bairstow's fault and if england want to blame anyone it should be him. After all he's a keeper and all keepers know the rules regarding the crease and gameplay etc.. especially considering he made a similar play in the previous innings and he's got a history of using the same rules to his advantage and then quoting 'its I'm the rules and it's part of the game'..
And you naturally did this at the end of an over.
When Australia bowled the underarm ball, they took away New Zealand's agency over that moment. In this case, Johnny Bairstow still had agency in that moment and chose not to use it. It was a sad way to lose his wicket, but ultimately, his own fault.
sadly this obvious fact needs to be explained to people like Morgan and others who sympathise with him.
The thing I find most sickening is the 'lost opportunity' and 'haven't moved past Sandpapergate' drivel, which Piers Morgan pontificated at the time. Just because Australia did the wrong thing 5 years ago, and egregiously so, doesn't mean that from then on - perhaps forever - they must play to some moral standard higher than everyone else, including their opponents in highest stakes competitive matches. Australia and the relevant players were punished at the time - rightly, and the team has cleaned up its act so that, one thinks, it will never happen again. That's enough, without Australia having to then play on some kind handicap system for 5 years or eternity thereafter.
Piers, the batsman doesn't rule over, the umpire does.
Exactly !
Yes 100%
One law for the Poms and another law for the others .
Meghan will be glad this has happened, she now gets a break from Morgan's big mouth. 🦘
The English are so used to making the rules they forgot who their cricket rules delegated authority to on the cricket field.
I like Piers, but Peter Lalor is right here. The players must play by the rules, and this was fair play, regardless of the fans' feelings.
Pierce is a whinging Pom. And he's Trump apologist. With his history, how dare Morgan talk about integrity......🤮
@@johnnichol9412 Corrected! Mind the lapsus! 😅
...or Piers's feelings.
When the ball is in the gloves and both batsmen are in their crease it’s a dead ball, you don’t then make it live again I’ve umpires and I would have laughed at the fielding side if they’d tried this.
I have supported Piers on just about everything argument he puts up, but this interview and a couple of others on this Bairstow stuff up, has me disliking him. I wouldn't be surprised if he has never played cricket at any level, and is just quoting what he has heard. He refuses to listen to the facts and avoids the words of previous English. captains. This just proves, that he is as bad as the average ignorant English members of the Marylebone Cricket Club.
Peter Lalor is one of the best cricket writers in the world, his opinion commands respect.
HAHAHA sounds like an uneducated whinger to me.
"Both umpires had moved to move away" shows vision where the standing umpire doesn't even take a step out of position.
i spotted that too, at most the standing umpire only looked down and Bairstow didn't even look at him before he started off.
You watch it from the various angles available, NEITHER umpire had moved.
Piers Morgan should let the guest talk. You let Geoff Boycott rant for minutes without interruption. But now you keep talking over peter for every two words he says. Yet you lecture about spirit of cricket. How about the spirit of being a good host and let the guest speak his mind? As an Indian and a cricket fan, I fully support the Aussies. Way to go!
Well said mate. I agree with Piers on most things; I generally disagree with him here although I didn't like the look of the dismissal as Bairstow wasn't trying to get an advantage. But even on causes I agree with Piers on, I wish he would stop interrupting the guest as I'd like to hear and understand their view so I can make my own judgement. That should be the job of the media, to allow both sides of an argument to be aired so the public can make informed decisions.
agree 100%
One key thing Piers doesn't understand, is that the ball was being returned BEFORE Bairstow scraped his foot. The ball was returned in one swift motion, and had Bairstow looked back to see this would never have occurred.
I completely agree with that.
That said, if you watch the video carefully, the only valid excuse for Bairstow's failure to look back, is the fact that he looked towards the bowler's end, where the umpire definitely began to react as though the over has ended. However, the umpire hadn't yet called 'over.'
From the umpire's initial movement (where he started to look down), I don't think he had yet spotted that Carey had not stopped playing. A full view of Carey would be blocked by Bairstow, and/or (like Bairstow) the umpire made a wrong assumption, because he wasn't paying sufficient attention.
@@davidbrear8642 Batsmen on both sides were doing exactly what Bairstow did throughout the game, wandering out of their creases at the end of overs without looking back or positive confirmation the ball was dead. If that’s careless then it’s something many batsmen are guilty of. It hadn’t been a problem before that, though, because before that nobody would have attempted a stumping, however Australia were enraged up by the Starc decision the day before! The most careless thing Bairstow did was thinking he could be complacent around the angered Australians!
It’s true that Carey threw the ball immediately, though. So it’s not necessarily that Carey was being unsporting, as much as Cummins was to not withdraw the appeal.
@@user-mk5io6yt9c Yes, you make very good points. This incident was the result of many combined factors not least revenge. The entire England team should have been on their toes after the Starc decision.
I previously pointed out on another thread that amongst international players it seems to have become an unspoken 'gentlemen's' agreement that, when the keeper is standing back to pace and the ball is cleanly pouched, if the batter is safe in his crease, both sides have invariably stopped playing and umpires have taken the same approach. Perhaps the laws of cricket will now be modified to deem the ball as automatically dead in these particular circumstances?
Currently in these particular circumstances in test matches, during overs (and even at the end of overs) when batsmen leave their crease for a chat or to do a bit of gardening, it's often unclear whether the ball is dead or still in play.
Doesn't understand or doesn't care, because he is an outrage factory and needs to be angry about _something_ when Megan and Harry aren't in the news.
@@davidbrear8642 Why change the rules? when all you need to do is pay attention to the current rules.
Starc's catch not being given was an absolute joke as well. He had 100% control of the ball since it hit his hands. He is a huge man and needed to put his hand down to protect himself on the way down.
Incorrect. The law clearly states it was correctly ruled.
@@gizmoza Laws and regulations are always amended/ altered. This law clearly needs to be changed.
@@swada02 why?
You won that game regardless so why talk about a catch that was 50-50? Smiths catch was not a clean catch, everyone knows it
it was a clean catch, but overturned on a technicality. he held the ball longer than most slip fielders catch it, then toss it up. its an inconsistent rule, and Starc should'nt have to twist his wrist and risk injury just to stop the ball from touching the grass. It wasnt a drop.
Piers is conflating 'Sandpaper Gate' with what happened to Jonny Bairstow. The two are not linked. Jonny was lazy and not paying attention.
Peter Lalor is such a great journalist, streets ahead of Piers, with his infinitely non existent cricket wisdom.
Morgan can call himself whatever he likes but I think he’s a celebrity.
Maybe ...don't know the person however what we are watching here is not journalism is it. On the face of it it's two guys with conflicting views about an incident in a cricket match. It could just as easily be you and I having a discussion in a pub. It's not journalism to have an opinion.
Ironically Piers is streets behind.
Watching Piers embarrass himself is an amazing thing to see 😂
@nafizimtiaz5680
absolutely😁
It's not infrequent...
Not really. It happens quite often.
How so?
Hes a walking embarrasment!
so piers doesn't like it when others don't let him talk but it's okay when he does it
Conveniently cutting off Lalor trying to tell how Steve Smith's mum left the ground in tears. Well done England, you absolute twatwaffles.
Thank you to all the Englishman and ladies ,who agree about the aussies not cheating ,and thank you for being fair !😊
Having now read what “the spirit of cricket” is as written in the laws of the game, it turns out that the only team and country that has not behaved in the “spirit of cricket” is ENGLAND!
Well said. Glad you said Laws, not Rules.
Yea what happened to respecting the decision of the umpire?
@@falaramal3979 that ended at the same time as saying “crease leave”! 🤣🤣🤣🙊
For the record. The Spirit of the game is NOT written into the actual Laws. It appears as a preamble to those Laws. Such as a preface would in a book.
3 things: 1. Baistow should have checked the over was over . 2. The ball was released by the keeper before he left the crease. 3. Bairstow has a bad habit of leaving his crease early constantly and the Ozzies noticed. That is his and the English coaching staffs fault for not resolving .
Comparing it to the underarm incident is just taking stupidity to a different level 😂😂
He was equating the Australian attitude to cricket not the laws of the game.
@brianwilson49
Remember the game with England and West Indies where the keeper waited the batter to slide his foot out of his crease and stumped him. Not to mention Bairstow tried the same f***ing thing in the same match so what does England know about the spirit of the game.
I think the umpire calls ‘over’, not the player. The play was clearly not over, the keeper in one movement caught the ball and threw it at the stumps. Let us take every incident on its own merit, rather than trying to right wrongs from previous matches. Piers, I really think you have lost this round fella…
"We probably would have been 2-0 up" has me dying hahahahahahah
What a stupid thing to say by piers. There's no ifs and buts
As much as I dont like Piers, England were in position to win both test matches.. 55 runs needed with 2 wickets to go on the final day with new ball, England were clear favorites.. they dropped too many catches.. and again here, England were chasing down a total with 2 of their best on the crease,, JB run out is more controversial as it robbed us on a great finish, I dont say that England would have won but it would have been an exciting contest.. its clear that JB was not trying to take any advantage (which was the case with Labushane attempt which everyone is citing as he stood out of the crease to negate swing), he clearly marked the crease, his only fault was to assume it was the end of the over, you can call it silly or dumb, but its what every batsmen does... even the leg umpire started moving and facing umpire was taking out the cap to give it to the bowler.. what didnt set with me well that it was not a competitive dismissal and it sets up a wrong precedent to win at any costs.. well the bar has been set, Aussies have opened up the door.. now everything with the laws of cricket will happen, irrespective of the situation..
@@ChatPOPPAT One could equally state that the patriotic effort by Nathan Lyon to bat, as he did, and contribute to a 21 run partnership could have amounted to a game winning effort.
Coulda shoulda woulda...the perfect response
The sandpaper boys will always be remembered as the biggest crybabies in history😂😂😂
"We should have won" is not an argument. Losing and then highlighting a single incident just displays a loser mentality.
Yeah they should have won lol, I love the way they say that considering that dismissal is what set Stokes off. How do they know if the Aussies had withdrawn the appeal Stokes would have played like he did? Typical poms that think they know the rules but don’t know this one
@@knight2425 The poms wrote the rules and still don't know them. 🤣🤣🤣
@@brettallan7417 Some of them know the rules but don’t want to abide by them when it’s to their detriment
They couldn’t even win on day one…
Ridiculous. Had England done to Australia what Australia did to them there’s a reasonably high chance they would have walked off the pitch and flown home. You only had to see their ridiculous response to the Starc grounded catch the day before, where they surrounded the umpire in an attempt to intimidate him.
"if we hadn't lost the two games we would have won them"
Top shelf analysis right here
We all saw England's spirit of the game during the world cup match against NZ 🤣
That was ruff 😮
I’d have done exactly the same thing if I were Australia tbh. Australia aren’t making these same silly mistakes, so why are England? This is professional cricket at the highest level.
Silly mistakes should be punished at this level - fair game.
Mitch Starc made the silly mistake of letting the ball scrape against the ground for a catch, and as a result, it was ruled not-out.
Bairstow would have done the exact same thing and Stokes would never have called the batsman back.
@@mickm6309lol 100% believe that lol.
Love how piers invites an Aussie on then doesn’t let them speak 😂
Exactly. We see and hear too much of him on Australian TV.
Best way.
exactly, he just loves the sound if his own voice and his arguments are very thin indeed.
love these aussies.
cheers from Melbourne.
poms are bad looses
So true.
The fact that piers for the most part can't tell that for the most part Peter is actually taking the piss out of him
I’m Australian and I’m glad we won in this way, because now we get a hilarious show of England proving to the world what sore losers they are. Much more entertaining than a regular win 😂
And if the roles were reversed, I would defend England. I’ve never believed in the Holy Spirit of Cricket that the Lords and Sirs made up but refuse to codify and even refuse to explain.
As a English fan, Australia did nothing wrong . Schoolboy error blown out of proportion.
If Bairstow was out of his crease at any point from the start of the bowlers run up to the ball entering the keeper's gloves, I would agree. But the fact that he tried to deliberately time it for the moment he left his crease after all of that was said and done, AND did so on the last ball of an over, makes it entirely unacceptable..... And I'm and Aussie.
@@johnnysoccer1983it was an instant throw. It was a schoolboy error
@@johnnysoccer1983well said mate
@@jakkaxn5513he instant throw, was, based on what Cummins said, related to what Carey had observed Bairstow doing earlier. Let's not pretend Carey was just being instinctive.. It was pre planned
@@jakkaxn5513 Choosing to go for an instant throw when the batter was never out of their crease in the hopes of timing it for when they leave AFTER they believe the ball dead and on the last ball of the over is a dog act to try and buy a wicket you couldn't get legitimately.
You could not write this script if you tried. One simple fair stumping and the players meltdown, the coach goes full hypocrite, the crowd meltsdown, the commentators meltdown, and even the old toffs in the long room turn feral. All their hopes and dreams shattered and thrown to the wind.
It is such classical English whinging. Historically embarassing. Historically funny as hell.
Smokescreen is what he said and how true haha.
And it’s why I always cheer for whoever England is playing lol.
Yes if the ball missed and went to the boundary the poms wouldn't of run a couple more runs,you know this because of the spirit of cricket thing they claim for themselves
And the Aussies acted true to form. It's the expectation that the Aussies may be committed to fair play that makes the English look stupid.
We Australians have a inferiority complex and will do anything to win……I’m afraid!!!
Where did Piers get the crazy idea that the batsman can "mark the end of the over"? That's not a thing. It's never been a thing. The umpire says when the over ends. Johnny Bairstow had brain fart. Plain and simple. He'd do exactly the same thing, and _has_ done exactly the same thing to a batsman when he's the one fielding the ball.
By not acknowledging that Carey had received the ball and was ready to consider it dead, Bairstow has shown a level of disrespect to his Australian counterpart.
As an England fan Australia did nothing wrong they took advantage of bairstows mistake. Since when does the batsman decide the over is finished.
Absolutely spot on. Bairstow was an idiot!
Exactly. Australia is the only team i would never cheer for in cricket. But that is out. Carey did nothing wrong
As a South African I love nothing more than seeing England and Australia going at each other. Having Pierce Morgan getting his own medicine is so much fun! But honestly, this "run out" is not cricket, it's bad sportsmanship. Nuff said.
@@NemoNiemand497 You see as an England supporter I do still disagree! It really wasn't hard to just stay in another second or two. I feel like people use the likes of MS Dhoni as a reference to how "good sportsmanship" should be displayed, but even that circumstance in my opinion was totally different to this! Bairstow (WHO MIGHT I ADD IS A WICKET KEEPER?! 😆) Doesn't even look back to see if Carey caught it or fumbled or whatever... (I appreciate it isn't village cricket) but it doesn't take a lot to just turn a head and see / check everything is ok!
@@NemoNiemand497 Its not even a run out. He was stumped. Nothing weird, and quite common even off a seamer. They saw their hopes and dreams dashed thats all.
As a Cricket Umpire myself he is out, the Umpire did not call Over. Even schoolboys/girls know are taught to stay in their crease until Over is called. It was his own fault. The spirit of the game does not come into it. The ball was not dead.
As soon as the game finished The headline in Australia on news corp online was “let the whinging commence”. The English didn’t let us down.
This is the side of Piers that is so difficult to love.
There’s a side that’s easy to love?
@@analogpixellmao that’s funny but I do like the way he handles some things (note that I said some)
The English should learn the rules and accept the umpire decision as out. They are acting unsportsmanlike.
They wrote them too
You sound clueless son.
@@pablojescobar3400 that's the most funniest thing that the writers of cricket rules and laws forget about them😆
Scraping a boot has no significance whatsoever. Piers lost the plot yet again
It's funny how 90% of the comments completely disagree with Piers Morgan whether English, Australian or neutral
Jehan. I see you everywhere and I await your input next on CFA Nation 😊.
Here after England's performance in WC...man its good to see Poms cry
Ah yes what a spirited debate where piers talked for about 7 and a half minutes and peter got about 30 seconds and then shoved off screen
That, my friend, is very typical of the way these "shock jocks" operate. They have their hand on the "kill" switch.
Piers keeps mentioning sandpapergate but conveniently never mentions England using mints to shine the ball for an entire 2005 Ashes series. As for cheaters, who is the only person convicted of cheating in this Ashes series? England's Moeen Ali.
Or that pocket full of dirt. How convenient!
Or the player that got pinned this series
No. Smith and Warner are convicted cheats if we’re going that way. Myopic Aussies. Never sinning but always sinned against.
That’s odd, myopic Dave. I thought that the convicted cheats were Smith, Warner and young Bancroft, etc.
The saliva from the Murray Mints was so game changing that you only complained after your boys got caught and the amino acids in the mints were obviously doing more damage than the abrasive sandpaper! There was also the case when Mark Waugh and Shane Warne got caught, taking money off of a bookie in Sri Lanka in 1994. CA didn’t give either of them a ban. Incredible to think that they covered it up for four years when you remember that Hanse Cronje forfeited his career for something similar.
Then there was Warney getting sent home from the World Cup in 1999, after falling a drugs test. Did CA give him a ban? No, of course not. They’re in a different position to anyone else.
Oh wait ... all of the above was the poms fault ... they forced those incidents onto poor old Australia!
🤣👍🤣👍🤣👍
Not once has Piers Morgan and the show's producers shown the angle from behind where both wicketkeeper and batsman are visible. If one sees that, it is clear as daylight, that Carey threw the ball much before Bairstow stepped out. Yes, he had been routinely stepping out immediately after the ball was bowled which the Aussies noticed. However, on that occasion, Carey did not see him step out. He just threw the ball, almost predicting that he may step out and he foolishly did the same. If the camera behind the keeper is shown, all the arguments die instantly. As for the Captain to withdraw the appeal, I think soon the English will ask to withdraw clean bowled while shouldering arms appeals because the batsman misjudged the ball. If you doze off you get out. This is TEST cricket for goodness sake.
“Coulda, Shoulda, Woulda” 💀
Piers as is perfectly demonstrated here in this unilateral one-sided interview and by his lack of knowledge of cricket laws, is the perfect example of an unadulterated winging pom. Australia did nothing wrong and England are just plain sore losers and deserve to the series 5 - 0.
Consider this hypothetical. Bairstow walks out of his crease in the exact same way, but instead stops and realizes that he's out of his crease while the ball is live. Bairstow immediately tries to get his bat behind the crease but just fails and is stumped. This would be considered by anyone to be an uncontroversial stumping. Bairstow's obliviousness can't dictate whether a dismissal is fair or not. Piers Morgan's argument is reductio ad absurdum.
@@Eric_Cartman______yet your own team did the same act in New Zealand. Hypocrite much? Loser.
This is a brilliant , i wish someone in the media picks up on this. There is absolutely NO argument after this. WELL SAID
Good argument and I don't even follow cricket, well done
"Consider this hypothetical. Bairstow walks out of his crease in the exact same way, but instead stops and realizes that he's out of his crease while the ball is live. Bairstow immediately tries to get his bat behind the crease but just fails and is stumped. This would be considered by anyone to be an uncontroversial stumping. Bairstow's obliviousness can't dictate whether a dismissal is fair or not. Piers Morgan's argument is reductio ad absurdum." That's a great comment.
I don't think you know what reductio ad absurdum means
I played club cricket and state underage cricket in Australia in the late 90s and early 2000s, and if I walked out of my crease before over was called and the ball was still alive, my coach would have ripped shreds through me 😂
"The Batsman doesn't get to decide when the over is done....That's the Umpires job."
As a neutral person i believe it was right decision from umpire and cummins , however stokes and english captain should have given back 5 overthrow runs to NZ for the spirit of the game but they prefered WC.😏
Totally different incidents piers. Sandpaper was pure cheating but Bairstow has been caught out doing what he’s done to others.
it was also pure cheating when England used mints to shine the ball for the entire 2005 Ashes series
Sandpaper happened cos the Aussies and the South Africans had bad blood outside the field as well, and both were at each others' throats. No excuse, but it was a very turbulent tour and emotions were out of control.
Was a dark day for Aussie cricket. We love to win. But not at any cost. And not by cheating.
“Scraping his boot denoting that its the end of the over”! My God, the ignorance and illiteracy as far as cricket knowledge is concerned by Piers Morgan in this clip is shocking !
The reality is that Carey threw the ball towards the stumps BEFORE Bairstow 'scratched' his boot behind the crease - so the ball was still in play even according to Piers's 'spiritual' rules of the game!
Bairstow didn’t expect the keeper to throw the ball at the stumps when he was clearly in the crease when the ball got to him. It is daft by Bairstow there is no doubt but it’s a bit of a dirty way to get someone out. Can people not agree on that?
Pierce I am neither English nor an Aussie, I am a cricket fan for over 48 years. Bairstow was so amateurish specially in such an important test and had a brain fade. The ball was in play, Carey threw it instinctively and caught him napping. Scraping of the boot was just in Bairstow's mind, that doesn't mean it is the end of the over. England is being a sore loser, they lost and they are taking the anger on one incident, smoke and mirrors buddy. And Pierce you can't be serious when you say if Bairstow was not out Eng would have won? What, Bairstow could have got out very next ball who knows and had Strokes hadn't played the innings of a lifetime it would been Eng losing by over 150 runs. Get some sleep
I am no Australian fan but they played the game within the rules. Piers and the poms should have another glass of vinegar and carry on with their lives.
I was at the MCG when the underarm was bowled. It is something to hear 80,000 fans boo their team.
Also, the batsman does not end the over, where does that come from?
Why would Johnny scrapping his boot mark the end of the over. Thats a decision that umpires make. Next time Warner nicks one to the slip, he should quickly scrap his boot before the catch is taken. Oh no over finished, ball dead, catch cannot be claimed. Absurd explanations from the English
@vivekpokhriyal5303
best comment lmfao🤣🤣😆😆
Morgan, if England had took more catches or scored more runs they would have won both tests 😂😂😂😂 if smith hadn't dropped Stokes England would have been beaten more easily.
If Australia had of won both tosses and had the favourable conditions instead of England, Australia would have won more comfortably.
If englnd scored 700 and got aussies out for 50 they would have won. 2nil down and 3 more to lose. Come on aussies. From a South African 🇿🇦
If my gran had wheels, she'd have been a bicycle.
@@runawaypuppet Your kind of rewriting the joke there, but good on you.
@@runawaypuppet I have to say, I'd be laughing like a mad man, if the tables were turned.
the ball was live when Bairstow got stumped, it isn't the Australians' responsibility to remind an experienced player to keep his bat grounded until the ball is deemed dead at the end of the over by the bowler's end umpire, that is the first thing we are taught when we pick up a cricket bat for the first time. Bairstow never looked back to Carey to get the all the clear, he just walked away from the crease in a daze.
The non-existent controversy brought up by a bunch of sore losers isn't going to change the fact that Bairstow made a beginner's mistake, even though he is an experienced player, and he is also a wicket-keeper, he should have known better than that. He simply had a significant lapse in concentration, which denied him of having any amount of situational awareness.
I find it very amusing that the people complaining about it the most, are the ones who wrote the laws of the game, the very same laws that rightly denied Starc of a catch when he grounded the ball, and the very same laws that got Bairstow out, in short, the Australians did nothing wrong, and the only in the wrong, is Bairstow himself.
If the roles are reversed, Stokes and Bairstow would have been classified as smart.
Carey outsmarted Bairstow in his own tactics and you could see it when he was walking off.
Let's move on, shall we.
I saw footage today of Bairstow holding his gloves by the stumps for a few seconds before stumping someone doing the same thing. Our guy throws the ball immediately. In real time its about 2 seconds between the ball passing and the stumps coming off.
Yes, and the English commentary team called it ‘very clever wicket keeping’. When asked about it after the match he said ‘it’s within the rules’.
According to the law England won the 2019 World Cup but to Save the spirit of cricket they should give it back to new zealand 😅😂
😂 😂
It crossed my mind at the time it could be shared.
Yeah according to spirit of game they should have given the trophy to new Zealand 😂
By the way Piers, the disgusting underarm incident was in 1981,not 1991.
@@margaretreid2153 And he got things wrong, Trevor Chappel argued with his brother over doing that, you can see he clearly didn't want to do it but in the end he did as his captain ordered him to do. In my view the only thing Trevor is guilty of is obeying his Captain.
The Poms DO owe us an apology! He abandoned the crease whilst the ball was still in play! He left him self vulnerable to a stumping, & he GOT stumped! Out fair and square! NEVER abandon your crease!
Marcus Trescothick admitted to using peppermints to varnish the ball in the 2005 Ashes, which helped the ball swing and defeat the Aussies. They then got OBEs.
Stuart Broad refused to walk in 2013 when he thick edged the ball to Michael Clarke at slip.
Where is Piers' outrage. Hypocrite.
If Starc's catch was given, England wouldn't even have come close this match. Piers has lose his mind.
Part of the spirit of cricket is accepting the umpire's decision
It was Bairstow's mistake. Carey took advantage of it.
No need to create more mess.😅
It's not that simple. It involves the spirit of the game
The fact that Australia went through scandal doesn't mean they stop winning games and giving the opposition chances to win in tricky situations. Its a really foul way of shaming, no reason whatsover to relate the 2 incidents.
Some of this is actually Piers Morgan's fault.
Just two days prior, Bairstow carried off an eco-protestor, which Piers announced to the world, which caused people outside the Cricket world (Americans, etc.) to look up who Bairstow is and thus Bairstow got millions of new social media views from all sorts of people who don't even watch cricket. When an English cricketer suddenly has tons of Americans, etc. praising him on social media, that is a distraction amidst an ongoing test match.
This made Bairstow have a lot on his mind, and that is why he wasn't paying attention here, just two days later.
So some of this is actually Piers Morgan's fault.
Yes, a large number of Americans like Piers Morgan he is a good professional television presenter but equal large number of Americans absolutely hate the guy. Did you see the road crash CNN TV interview Alex Jones on the gun debate in late 2013. The reason Alex Jones was invited on is because Alex Jones got a petition going to deport Piers Morgan from America. That CNN interview with Alex Jones is widely held as a reason for Piers Morgan's curtailed tv career in America. The guy at the time was an upcoming star at CNN until Piers Morgan got involved in American politics and that did not go down well with Americans and Englishman telling Americans what to do. Last time that happened Americans had a war over it with the English in 1776.
Piers wants to introduce Woke Cricket. It starts with a few rule changes. it is now the batsman that tells the umpire when a ball is dead, and when the over is finished. Also, scratching the ground with your spriggs becomes the universal signal that you now cannot be dismissed. Another new rule is to let all batsmen get offered a second chance in case they feel poorly or offended about anything.
My niece thinks that Bairstow fella looks exactly like a gingerbread man she made for chirstmas.
I like your point, but woke actually means aware and accepting of a need to redress discrimination, particularly racial discrimination. It is unfortunate that you used the American bastardisation of the word, a tactic used to keep groups of people subjugated and to protect the power and position of old white men. (But then, isn’t that the composition of the group in the Long Room who showed us what the spirit of the gentleman's game should look like?)
@@Bellas1717 Grow up and tell the story to someone in your victim group that might care.
@@thatsbollox it is actually quite grown up to be able to accept another point of view. It is quite the opposite to be dismissive and insulting. I belong to no group. I am not a victim. I simply bring a little discernment to what I read and hear, especially the spin coming out of America.
Let’s get back to enjoying the cricket.
@@Bellas1717 Thats wonderful. Truly it is. However i didnt come here for anyone else's "point of view", for your discernment, definitions of woke, nor your naive evangelical political advice. In fact just take a hike bozo.
Lack of consentration from Bairstow. That is out all day long.
As a Brit, i cant believe what i am listening to. Expecting some kind of apology from Australia for doing their job and doing something legal. its hilarious, our team embarrassing themselves throwing toys out of the pram.
Bairstow is supposed to be a Test cricket wicket-keeper - could have fooled me.
The only thing unsporting is Bairstow not walking once out. Cricket is a gentleman's game. He should have walked once he realised his mistake.
Yes it's a gentleman's so why is it played by Aussie's
@@jeffmackie547 England have proven that cricket is no longer played just by gentlemen. While we Australians have our fair share of gentlemen, the term "gentlemen's game" is anachronistic.
@@Bellas1717 Yep bodyline
@@jeffmackie547 because England burnt the stumps after losing.
@@Bellas1717 Oh there's nowt like a good laugh
Sandpaper gate has nothing to do with this! This just Piers and English way of trying to cry 😂😂
and he conveniently never mentioned England used mints to shine the ball for the entire 2005 Ashes series
@@DaveWhoa We would have flogged England that series had they not cheated. At the time, I had my suspicions they were cheating when watching that series, because they were getting the ball to revers swing within 20 overs.
I find sandpaper gate disgusting as all Aussies do, but England have no moral high ground when it comes to cheating.
The reason Starc grassed his catch was that he believed he had caught it and the action was over. That was one of the cleanest catches you will ever see. But according to rules he didnt. Aus respected the decision. Baristow thought that it was over, but the ump hadnt called it and hence according to the rules, he is out. So lets stop whinning. Piers comparing a perfectly hatched plan to bowl underarm to a spontaneous reaction of throwing down the stumps is hilarious.
Piers refers to a time when he did a lunch break filler/stunt for tv by padding up to face Brett Lee in the nets. He put on every bit of protective gear available. What was going to be a 'gentlemans' arrangement with Brett bowling at a moderate pace changed when Piers big mouth got in the way and started mouthing off to the point of being rude. Brett didnt take too kindly to the comments and suddenly cranked his pace up. Piers got continually hit to the point where i thought he could have been hurt. It was serious at the time but then Piers and his big mouth got what he deserved.
I do wish morgan would allow his guests to finish a sentence..I am very surprised anyone appears on that show.
Well, like Piers said, no one else would.
@@murph7421 Shocking that no-one would want to spend 7 and a half minutes of an 8 minute interview being bullied and berated by the host, then interrupted and muted whenever they get a chance to counter Piers' logical fallacies and whataboutism.
The more times they run the Bairstow stumping, the more comical he looks!🤣
I love how every clip of Piers Morgan is just him getting horribly embarrassed on his own show. It’s so funny that he calls his show “uncensored” when he’s the most milquetoast, safe, conservative puppet in media. He tries so hard to be transgressive, and then gets horribly offended and cries when people call him out for being an idiot
The batsman doesn't decide when the over is over, the umpire does. Stay in your crease until you hear over.
Was bowling bouncers to the injured Nathan Lyon in the " spirit of the game"
exactly, and was refusing him a runner also 'in the spirit of the game'? Hmmm
As an American with absolutely no knowledge of cricket I find this whole tempest highly amusing.
Tune in for tomorrows next Test at Leeds….
They’ll be more fireworks than July 4th
I hear Dave Portnoy is our resident cricket expert across the pond 😅
You like English defeat??
In Cricket there are 3 formats in which 5 days cricket is the longest format and in which a player need more skill, more patience both physically and mentally... And other two one day and T20 are just for entertainment which last 7 hours and 2.5 hours respectively.... In 5 days cricket there are lot of minor things which can be sought out by both teams by themselves and they also have laws for it, as these minor things can be a loopholes in laws of cricket on which a team can take advantage... In this particular case Australian wicket keeper stumped (out) English cricketer by that minor thing on which English cricketer doesn't want to take any advantage and which costs England the match... And also Cricket is known as Gentlemen's game not because only mens play it (women's also play it) but all players are supposed to play it within spirit of game...
Cricket 🏏 is religion
Matches between Australia 🇦🇺 - England 🏴 , India 🇮🇳-pakistan are serious business . You get over billion people watching the game .
Linking this to sand paper gate is virtually an admission that they have no case in regard to the current situation and Morgan is desperate..Bairstow walked out of his crease after the ball was thrown by Carey immediately after being pouched by him and was still in the air not before Bairstow lumbered up the pitch. That makes it open and shut.I have never heard of '' marking'' your crease before. That is a new one on me and comes late in the media onslaught after Australia has marked its crease on Bairstow and moved on.. It that has not been mentioned before nor have I ever heard it ever mentioned by any of the expert test cricket commentators ever. What is Bairstow? A rhinoceros. Who was supposed to see this crease marking anyway and interpret it when mixed in with all Bairstow's fidgeting around in his pissing patch? Is there a rule of the game giving it force as to stumpings and run outs if it is of such significance or perhaps its the ritual that summons up the ''spirit'' of the game.? Carey was keeping to a quick, Green, and was well back from the stumps at a slightly lower elevation and his vision of the crease is obscured by the wicket and the rhinoceros Bairstow. I just hope next time Bairstow does not adopt the full procedure of how rhinos mark their territory. Did Carey see this marking of the crease or even did Pat Cummings or is this whole late assertion of ''crease marking'' something that Piers Morgan pulled out of his ass when cornered and is now ''marking his crease''. I played competition cricket as a youngster and earlier on as a wicketkeeper that has stumped batters and I never heard of it.This guy Piers Morgan is a self promoter, not too bright and his mental associations are crude and unsophisticated and at the best of times ''omelettes''.
Morgan has this literally in your face annoying inflated screen presence to conceal that there is not that much behind his big head that is visually pushed down your throat. I doubt his camera people would last long if they switched frame from his annoying over blown close ups. Morgan' s big protruding head recently claimed that the Russian invasion of Ukraine was an illegal war of aggression just like the second Gulf war that he led the Daily Mail charge on this ( presumably with his head like a rhino but without a brain) when he clearly has no legal qualifications. The Second Gulf War is not an illegal war of aggression by either the U.S.A.or the U.K. as neither were attempting to annex Iraq or alter international law boundaries. The First Gulf war was, however, by Hussein who illegally annexed Kuwait and this is the true legal analogy with the war against Ukraine. Morgan is an opinionated big mouth that does not do any research into what he says especially as to idiotic legal statements like that which echo lefty beat ups about the Second Gulf war. Morgan actually trivialized the Russian invasion of Ukraine while he was criticising it in a head butting competition with one of the dime-a-dozen Russian liars conducting the Kremlin's language war that he decided to air as his '' head on lying mouth'' show.
Why are there always large close ups of his face and head taking up all the screen where guests are reduced and distant? Is he just ''marking his crease'' with his noggin while he talks out of his arse? Do him and Bairstow belong to the same secret Rhino club and you have to drag your feet along the ground to get into the clubhouse hidden away in the confines of the MCC? I wonder if it admits women and ethnic minorities if they know the '' crease mark'' dance as I will now point out?
This Bairstow sore loser crap is just a tabloid beat up where the real story is the RACISM shown in the MCC Long Room to Khwaja who was not an actor in Bairstow's lawful dismissal that also conforms to the spirit of the game. The English cricket (critic) team have a systemic weakness and that is their rhino tail never wags but their mouth does instead and there is no runs in that. 6 wickets out of 10 is virtually the same as all out to the inventors of the game that they lose more often than not with disguised resentment to the upstart down under colonials. Not just in this team but in prior teams the English bowlers simply regard batting as an annoying delay before they get to bowl at teams that use up to10 wickets to get runs and yet they wonder why they lose.How do they expect to beat a team that will fight right down to the last of 10 wickets when England virtually pull up stumps when their recognised bats are out. Do they mark their crease at 6 wickets? It is relevant here because Bairstow being lawfully dismissed meant unless Stokes had to do it all on his own as he did once before raising British hopes. However, Stokes now had to do it with half-hearted partners or the match would be lost, as it was dashing those raised hopes and causing their sore loser chorus that Bairstow was cheated out by those unbelievers who remained unfazed by the '' spirit'' let loose by Bairstow's rhino impersonation, perhaps adopted from Ionesco's play of the same name in a Peter Brook revival. Aussie do not know all that much about French theatre. No one in English cricket expects the bowlers to save the day with the bat. Why not? That would not be English cricket and that is why losing by over 40 runs means this test was not close at all because 40 runs is beyond the horizon of the English tail and out of their ''unmarked'' crease. In the 1st test Australian tailenders chased down the English total with tail end wickets to spare, batting last on a water logged outfield after losing the toss and instead English cricket whined about their own 8 wicket '' Bazball'' declaration when Root had run out of real partners like Stokes because Bairstow's ''marked crease'' went unnoticed by the colonial trespassers. Stay on message and the message on this is the RACISM that surfaced in the Long Room against Khwaja who not coincidentally has been consistently the biggest thorn in the side in outgunning the English 6 wicket batting team by frustrating its no bat bowling team. The MCC dropped their guard and showed their true colors about this Bairstow beat up when they quickly shifted their focus to Khwaja who was unconnected to the Bairstow incident and letting their mask slip unless of course Khwaja was the only player aware of rhino Bairstow '' marking his crease''.? Is Bairstow a white or a black rhino? We all know the answer to that one, don,t we?. Be careful this Australian side has no systemic weaknesses and if you make them angry then England may get annihilated after '' marking their crease'' at 6 wickets.
Shocking ‘facts’- Sandpaper gate was 5 years ago, not 3! Underarm was ‘81 but I heard him say ‘91! Lazy journalism.
We have a few bad commentators here in Australia but thank God we don't have Piers Morgan.
He doesn't really care , he just takes the opposite view to get air time
Thank god Australia is where the UK sent all its prisoners. Racist sexist backward hell hole
Man I love Aussie commentary. Can you give me an example for a bad Australian commentator?
And get here you are
@@nsh1772 Most of the faces on Sky News would fit the bill as well as out famous Alan Jones
The problem with P Morgan is that if the guests doesn't agree with him, he doesn't let them talk. And sometimes, he talks alot of shite.
It's within the rules of the game and that's how it is,” - Jonny Bairstow 2014
Why is Piers ignoring that Bairstow did the same thing when keeping to a spinner
Because that would take away his argument.
That infamous underarm move in the game between New Zealand and Australia occurred in 1981, not 1991.
And Piers has to go back 42 years to find something to brandish. Sad.
He should ask kiwis. We can find something in every game Brad Haddin played in 😡
@@ChrisBrown-or8ky Does the same apply to Brendon McCullum?
the umpire was right
Even if Bairstow scrapes his boot across his crease, it's not HIS call to say that the over is finished. I totally agree with Lalor!
I’m 4 minutes in and the Aussie has said no more than 12 words. Piers is an embarrassment.
Give it a bloody rest Piers. Not every member of the public says it was wrong. Infact its more 50/50 with English folk, and given that, it just shows you it's not as bad as you think. Absolute waffle!
Most of the past England players including captains have come out and supported Australia over this, it’s just the sore losers that are looking for a way to blame everyone else that are whinging at the moment
couldnt agree more. A painful listen. Like so many of the other interviews he does.
Saying “we should have won at Edgebaston” is like I should have won lotto even though I didn’t buy a ticket 😂
They certainly shouldn't have lost. That stupid declaration made me laugh so hard
We were the better side at Edgbaston throughout the 5 days and made stupid decisions and crucial times which made it too close and you won a game you didn’t deserve! Happens all the time in any sport. You deserved to win at Lords regardless of Bairstow but I just think you didn’t need to revert to those tactics
@@Shandyboy8612 I was on your side til you had a bitch about the stumping
Funny thing is the batsman doesn’t define when the ball is dead
I 100% agree with the Aussie! Surely the over is not finished with until the play is ended. The wicket keeper did what he did in one continuous move, so play was not over and the batsman should have waited!
It's over when the batsman scratches the crease with his foot once.....lol
@@jehanariyaratnam2874 No, it's over when the batsman adjusts his cup. 🤪
Bairstow was warned by the Australian wicket keeper, if he stepped outside again, he’d stub him out…..tough luck little englanders !!!