tbh the aussies have said it openely that they would have done the same and not walk. so I think the argument stops there.

But as far as im concerned I think all cricketers should have abit descency and not do that sort of thing. But thats not how the world is.

Wasent a Laxman called all sorts on here, when he allegedly nicked the ball, even though hotshot dident show anything?

Then Broad checked his bat to see if he had anything on it. But that was a laugh. Not like when Peiterson got accused and the ECB were up on arms about it.

Going by what England fans on here, reacted to Laxman...

Broad must be a Filthy cheat.

Sanctimonious, like i say...

you mean to say you have never deliberately held back the truth, or done something to get an unfair advantage?
Hypocrites, like i say....!

The problem I have with cricketers is their hypocritical attitude. As viru said, some of the Aussie's said they too would not walk yet you have the likes of Ponting and others claiming that a player should walk if he knows he's nicked it. Then you have England who were livid with Laxman but got very defensive when Pietersen was accused of the same thing.

These are just 2 examples - every team is guilty of doing it. If you're going to say that you should walk, you need to practice what you preach.

Why did the ECB cause such a stir when Peiterson got accused of putting tape on a bat?? But was a joke when Broad checked Laxmans.?

Or England fans calling Laxman a cheat, but now justifying Broad not walking?

Seems this article is pointless, as it's fairly obvious, to England and fans, that Broad is a cheat.

Unless it's different when it is actually an England player.

"Seems this article is pointless, as it's fairly obvious, to England and fans, that Broad is a cheat"

Ha ha, so its a pointless article but here you are, banging on and on about it aren't you?
I get sick to death of listening to people who regularly cheat on their wives, their taxes, their benefits making a fuss because someone in the public eye doesn't walk when he is given NOT OUT. And thats the crux of the matter isn't it, that the Umpires and the cricket authorities are there to stamp down on this and if they don't do their job then why bang on about how the game stinks?
The Aussies are SO hypocritical, Clarke did this once and did the Aussie papers make a fuss of their great cricketing legend cheating? No, rather surprisingly they didn't.
Grow a pair and get on with it

Just highlighting why this could be deemed pointless.

Want Laxman accused of cheating by England fans? Especially on here.

Do why is Broad NOT a cheat?

#so

Because he was given NOT OUT

This is not open to interpretation

I can understand why broad stood his ground, its true that the majority of players from every country would have done the same thing. However, personally I disagree and think if you know you’ve edged it, be a man and walk off…….

However, if you are going to take the opinion that what broad did was right, then you have to be consistent especially if it goes against your own team. I’ve heard many many England fans support broad (which is fair enough), however, when I ask the question, regarding maradona’s handball vs england in the QF in 1986 – they all have the opposite view and say England were cheated. Why?

Fair enough Afridi.

I really don't think a player should walk. The umpires get alot of decisions wrong, and many times a batsman is given out, when they really were not. So, I guess it even things out.

Same goes for any sport. Not many footballers would admit, during play, that they conceded a penalty, or even a free kick. That's what the refs there for.

Same with tennis, rugby etc.....

comment by Keep It Greasey (U1396)
posted 25 minutes ago
Because he was given NOT OUT

This is not open to interpretation
----------------------------------------------------------------------

"Because he was given NOT OUT

This is not open to interpretation"

Absolutely, Greasey....you just nailed it

Neon,

So maradona was right to do what he did?

Afridi, listen - I can understand what Maradonna did, God help me I HATE him for doing it but I can understand it. Look it happened years ago, why do we never forget??! Its over, in the past, history,lets move on.
By the way I don't advocate cheating, I just think it happens - strikers score 'goals' that they know are offside, players lunge into tackles and don't get booked.Do they hold their hands up and say, 'honest gov it was me that did it, you can book me if you want?' Do they heck.
If the Aussies want to barrack Broad, great, hope they do.
I just hate how hypocritical ENGLISH people are on some of these sites like they never once even swore,cheat or did anything wrong, who are they, the POPE??

..And by the way there WAS an English Pope by the name of Adrian, for those who want to pull me up on that one!!

Drbantam,

Fair play to you - you're the first englishman to say you understand what and why mara did it.

Maradona. Interesting.

We'll it's slightly different.

Maradona intentionally cheated, and his it from the ref. That's more compatible to ball tampering in Cricket.

Broad not walking, is more like a player admitting it was a penalty.

I don't think Broad and maradonna are like for like comparisions

Neon, what are you on? Maradona intentionally handled the ball into the goal. Broad intentionally didn’t walk knowing he nicked it. Broad has come out today and said he’d do the exact same thing if it were to happen again. Point is, both instances were intentional. The action of both players after the event was deliberate and intentional. So a like for like comparison is more than reasonable.

Do I hear a sentiment here that because we cheated in a certain walk of life, we would be hypocritical to express outrage when others cheat? Is the nature of cheating a factor to be considered?

Neon,

As per kash, can you ask Robbie why he has some of us filtered?

comment by Afridi14 - THE LION says Hello!! (U2805)
posted 43 minutes ago

Neon, what are you on? Maradona intentionally handled the ball into the goal. Broad intentionally didn’t walk knowing he nicked it. Broad has come out today and said he’d do the exact same thing if it were to happen again. Point is, both instances were intentional. The action of both players after the event was deliberate and intentional. So a like for like comparison is more than reasonable.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

The 2 examples are different.

Maradonna intentionally cheated by using his hand and scoring, then did not mention it to the ref.

Broad did not "cheat" in anyway. He has not broken the rules of the game, all he has done, was not admit to it and waited for the umpire to make a decision. AGAIN, rules broken.. all he has done, was waited for the umpire to make a decision, and gone with it. Which he is entitled to.

Maradonna "Intentionally" cheated, by breaking the rules of the game and using his hand.

Like I said, the 2 are different.

I would compare Broad, to lets say a defender, who has caught a player in the box, but a penalty is not given. he does not put his hands up and say he has fouled the opposition.

"Maradona intentionally handled the ball into the goal. Broad intentionally didn’t walk knowing he nicked it"

Just because you can use the word "intentionally" in both, does not mean they are alike.

Maradonna handled the ball - i.e. cheated to score
Broad - Intentioally did not walk - breaking no rules and, to add, is not something which is a rarity in the game

Right, so let me get this straight:

1) You agree that both were intentional
2) You agree that both were deliberate
3) But you still think one cheated and the other didn’t break a rule, so they aren’t alike….

Lets deal with 3) then based on “rules” if that’s the criteria you want to use.

Maradona handled the ball – scoring a goal via hand is against the rules of football, IRRESPECTIVE of whether the referee sees it or not. If a referee misses it and allows the goal, he has made a mistake. If the players tells the ref I handled it, the decision is NO GOAL.

Broad edges the ball – edging it and getting caught behind is OUT from a legal delivery. If the umpire misses the edge and gives it not out, he’s made a mistake. If the player tells the umpire I edged it, the decision is OUT.

For both of these examples, the officials have got it wrong. The players in both instances know the “rules” but decide to hide the facts from the officials. Are they right or wrong? How on earth can you conclude that these two instances are not comparable is beyond me.

Maradonna intentionally broke the rules, by intentionally using his hand to score.

Broad, played a shot which clipped his bat and was caught.

SO, part 1, the initial "crime", Maradona has committed one, and knows full well he cannot handle the ball, but has done so, and scored. Thus at this point he is cheating.

Broad Edges the ball and it carried, he played a shot, has broke no rules.

Second part is admitting.

Maradonna celebrated and claimed his goal
Broad did not walk and kept his wicket.

Now, from the above, you see where I am coming from?

Maradonna's was outright cheating, intentional and deliberate.

You are just seeing the second part of this, whereby neither admitted to it.

However the actual incidents are far from alike.

Broad did not cheat, he did not break the rules of the game, he , in all aspects, has done nothing wrong, barr going against gentlemanly conduct.

i.e. 1 has gone against the rules of the game
the other did not.