What's new

If a Non-Big 3 player behaved like Jason Roy as he did in the World Cup Semi-Final?

Rellu_Katta

Local Club Regular
Joined
Jun 25, 2019
Runs
1,560
ICC is fast becoming a shame for sports viewer... 30% fine to Roy on what i think was one of the worst reaction i have seen by a batsmen on cricketing field..

Just think what would have happened to any player outside the "Big 3"
i think he would be atleast banned for 3-5 odis...

ICC proper shameless bunch
 
He did nothing wrong. The fact that he has been fined is nonsense. The only one who deserves to be fined is Dharmasena.
 
He did nothing wrong. The fact that he has been fined is nonsense. The only one who deserves to be fined is Dharmasena.

Just saw it now. It’s not as terrible as it is made out to be. Naturally you would feel robbed at a decision like that.
 
He did nothing wrong. The fact that he has been fined is nonsense. The only one who deserves to be fined is Dharmasena.
Really this means that every batsmen should be punished for getting out on a bad shot, mistakes and human error are part of the game that does not give the player the authority to start behaving like a brat on the pitch
 
He did nothing wrong?!!
Learn the rules son, before you post!!!

I know the rules and I think they should be amended. The umpires have to much freedom to act dumb, and an awful like Dharmasena doesn’t deserve extra protection.
 
Really this means that every batsmen should be punished for getting out on a bad shot, mistakes and human error are part of the game that does not give the player the authority to start behaving like a brat on the pitch

Dharmasena as usual buckled under the pressure of the appeal. It was very clear from his body-language that he was uncertain. If the umpire is uncertain, he is bound to check with the tv umpire.

It appears that his ego got the better of him and he probably knew that he messed up for the millionth time. He needs to removed from the Elite Panel immediately.
 
Just saw it now. It’s not as terrible as it is made out to be. Naturally you would feel robbed at a decision like that.

He was on the brink of a World Cup semi-final century and the usual idiocy of Dharmasena robbed him. Of course he was livid.
 
I know the rules and I think they should be amended. The umpires have to much freedom to act dumb, and an awful like Dharmasena doesn’t deserve extra protection.
When a game is based on an official's (umpire) judgement, errors will occur!
Thats why cricket is a amateur sport, no matter how much they try to pretend its a professional sport!
Remember, cricket was originally a village game, in some aspects, it is still a village game!!
 
I understand he displayed some dissent but it’s not so bad that he should be banned for an extra match. There is a feeling of natural reaction at being given out on a shocker. Poor appealing by the Aussies as usual!
 
When a game is based on an official's (umpire) judgement, errors will occur!
Thats why cricket is a amateur sport, no matter how much they try to pretend its a professional sport!
Remember, cricket was originally a village game, in some aspects, it is still a village game!!

Basically every game is decided by umpires. Is every game a village game now?

Go post your nonsense somewhere else.
Cricket is a high intellect game, that has many different factors to consider when playing.

You clearly dont understand the game.
 
Last edited:
Should have been banned. Everyone agrees that it was a blunder by the umpire, but we have seen bigger errors than this one, so Roy, yes feeling disappointed big time, should have walked right away!

And remember it was Roy, who was at fault when Bairstow took a stupid review, which was plumb. Was Roy sleeping at non-striker end? So now when no review was left, it was his own mistake.

ICC simply doesn’t have b.alls to ban an important english player!
 
He was on the brink of a World Cup semi-final century and the usual idiocy of Dharmasena robbed him. Of course he was livid.

So was he sleeping when he allowed Bairstow to review a fairly plumb LBW decision? You are acting like a typical pakistani poster who has pre-decided one side is correct no matter what.
 
Cricket is such a wimpy sport at times. You are playing in a WC semi final and you are the verge of a century but the umpire makes a blunder and you aren’t even allowed to show your frustrations. Are players not allowed to express their emotions? Are they supposed to accept the poor decision and just walk off the pitch? I’m sick and tired of these sporting governing bodies protecting incompetent umpires. It’s the same nonsense in football. Referees make huge blunders every week, yet if a manager of a team criticises him in his post match interview, he gets fined. When are these incompetent sporting governing bodies like the ICC, FA going to stop protecting these rubbish umpires/referees?
 
Last edited:
Roy was playing a WC semi final and had a chance to score a century in the semis of the WC. While its not according to the rules but its an understandable reaction in my opinion, most people would be furious as well on being given out of a leg side ball which they didnt even touch.

Its so surprising to see that there is all sort of technology available and if umpire has any doubt himself he can always check with the 3rd umpire (Have seen it happen before).
 
Understandable that Roy was annoyed as the ball should have been called a wide, but he lost his wicket to it for no reason.

However he let his emotions get the better of him and his reaction was too strong. Two demerit points and a match fee fine was a proportionate punishment for this.

Any calls for him to get an immediate ban are ridiculous. Forgot bias in favour of the Big 3 - if anything such a idea reveals bias in that poster against an English player.
 
Come on now he is a human.He can express his frustration.It was the big stage of a SF and he was about to get a century.Its natural that he questioned the decision a bit vehemently.He must have known that he had not hit it and it would have felt really frustrating.But since it was against the rules so a punishment was expected but a fine is enough,big 3 or not.

If however a player apart from the big 3 ended up getting a 3-5 ODI ban like you say,than that would have been unfair and uncalled for. This is just fine.
 
Dickwella was once caught of his arm guard, merely looked at it and didn't say anything - he got a ban! It's starting to ****** me off, in pretty much every match, India and England have bowled their overs too slowly without fines; yet Pakistan, NZ, SL & WI all fined for slow over rates!

There are some inferiority complex patients here saying this is alright and nothing is wrong ..and the umpire should be fined... these guys would be busting balls if a non-big 3 was the one doing this... talk abt being retarted with self-shame
 
So was he sleeping when he allowed Bairstow to review a fairly plumb LBW decision? You are acting like a typical pakistani poster who has pre-decided one side is correct no matter what.

It is not about the review. If you look at it again, Dharmasena was visibly under-confident about the decision. In fact, he even said “No” before he raised his finger.

If an umpire is not certain about a decision, what does he do? He gives a soft signal and refers the tv umpire, and that is what Dharmasena should have done.

This isn’t the first or the last time he has proved himself to be an utterly incompetent umpire. If you are utterly incompetent and most of your decisions turn out to be wrong, why won’t you consult with the tv umpire when you are uncertain in the first place?
 
Dickwella was once caught of his arm guard, merely looked at it and didn't say anything - he got a ban! It's starting to ****** me off, in pretty much every match, India and England have bowled their overs too slowly without fines; yet Pakistan, NZ, SL & WI all fined for slow over rates!

There are some inferiority complex patients here saying this is alright and nothing is wrong ..and the umpire should be fined... these guys would be busting balls if a non-big 3 was the one doing this... talk abt being retarted with self-shame

If you put your blatantly obvious victim mentality aside, you would realize that Roy has had his match fee docked and Kohli, who is also part of the evil big 3 empire, had to pay a fine as well in one of the earlier games.

Of course you can always claim that if a Pakistani or a non-evil board player did what Roy did, he would be banned for multiple games and not just have his match fee docked. If that is how you think then I don’t think anyone can help you.
 
Fine for Roy is fine but it is no secret that players from outside big 3 get bigger punishments. In the England vs Pak match radio commentators were anticipating England will be penalised for being well behind on over rates and no one mentioned Pak were. Guess who got fined?
 
The point is not about the ruling or the law or emotions.

It's about the fact that if it was anyone else outside big 3 they would have been banned and he got a slap on the wrist. He should have been banned.
 
He should be banned. Most people on Aussie cricket forums also agree that he was out of line and should miss the final.
 
[MENTION=131701]Mamoon[/MENTION] you are usually sensible but now you're just being biased. There's no other way to put it.

Roy's behaviour was deplorable to be honest. I guess he forgot that in the game against India he was given not out when he clearly gloved the ball down the leg side.

If he could accept that decision in favour of him he should be man enough to accept a decision that went against him.

And while a ban would have been an exaggeration as well, Roy certainly deserved 2 demerit points.

That would have taken his current tally to 3 demerit points which means he would still be able to play the final. But letting him off like this really sets a terrible example for world cricket.
 
I know the rules and I think they should be amended. The umpires have to much freedom to act dumb, and an awful like Dharmasena doesn’t deserve extra protection.

Yet he gets to umpire the final it's disgrace.

Roy had every right to express his feelings. Kumar Dharmasena should have been the one on the receiving end of a fine.

Also lol at the PPers who want him banned.
 
Some Fans and ICC both expect players to be robots. Roy was deducted match fee which is fair enough as per rules. However he was right in his frustration, if I was in his place I would have been exact same. In fact not just me most people would act the same way. That's how human emotions work.
 
When a game is based on an official's (umpire) judgement, errors will occur!
Thats why cricket is a amateur sport, no matter how much they try to pretend its a professional sport!
Remember, cricket was originally a village game, in some aspects, it is still a village game!!

When you get paid for a sport than it is a Professional sport. If Cricket is your main source of income than you are a Professional Cricketer. The amount of infrastructure and resources that is involved in Cricket now, it is most definitely a Professional support.
 
Roy crossed the line should have been banned for atleast 3 ODIs but ICC saved him hopefully he will get a golden duck come Sunday
 
Roy crossed the line should have been banned for atleast 3 ODIs but ICC saved him hopefully he will get a golden duck come Sunday

Disgraceful scenes.

D_SS8VrXsAICSFH


D_SPQRDW4AA0o2N


D_R6V7iVUAEMBju


Capture.JPG
 
Last edited:
[MENTION=131701]Mamoon[/MENTION] you are usually sensible but now you're just being biased. There's no other way to put it.

Roy's behaviour was deplorable to be honest. I guess he forgot that in the game against India he was given not out when he clearly gloved the ball down the leg side.

If he could accept that decision in favour of him he should be man enough to accept a decision that went against him.

And while a ban would have been an exaggeration as well, Roy certainly deserved 2 demerit points.

That would have taken his current tally to 3 demerit points which means he would still be able to play the final. But letting him off like this really sets a terrible example for world cricket.

It wasn’t just a regular mistake by the umpire. Dharmasena initially mouthed “no” but then gave it out. It was very obvious that he was uncertain. What does an umpire do in this situation? He gives a soft signal and refers to the tv umpire for confirmation.

Dharmasena didn’t do that and he stuck to his decision even though he wasn’t certain. Any player in Roy’s position would be livid, let alone a batsman on the brink of a World Cup semi-final century.

Dharmasena has proved it time and time again that he is an incompetent umpire. I am sure even he doesn’t know what he’s doing in the elite panel.
 
The umpire decision is final. You can’t behave like that. This isn’t football where you can get away with treating the officials poorly. If you are given you, you walk off and if you have any issues you speak to the umpire after the game

No other player would have been banned unless they were over the demerit points system. Stop playing the victim. He has been punished instantly for his mistake.
 
They shouldn't have reviewed the lbw decision of Bairstow then. But yes, it was a poor decision by Dharmasene. Mistakes happen, it's part of the game, but what's poor is how obvious it was Dharmasena himself was unsure, he mouthed 'no' before giving it out, he clearly gave it out based on the appeal, which is not good umpiring. Roy had every right to be angry, no player likes to be given out, but it might prompt England to be more serious with their reviews in the future. He definitely deserved to be punished, his reactio was unacceptable, he dropped a few expletives and showed serious dissent. A ban was possible.
 
Got away with a possible ban. Dharmasena was terrible though. The umpiring has been below par in this WC.
 
I think fine and demerit points are good enough. If he collects enough demerit points, he may get a ban anyway.
 
When a game is based on an official's (umpire) judgement, errors will occur!
Thats why cricket is a amateur sport, no matter how much they try to pretend its a professional sport!
Remember, cricket was originally a village game, in some aspects, it is still a village game!!

Very well put, some posters in this forum just blindly obeys the white man and they can’t do any wrong. Bow down to Roy :bow: if it was a brown guy he would have been eaten alive
 
They shouldn't have reviewed the lbw decision of Bairstow then. But yes, it was a poor decision by Dharmasene. Mistakes happen, it's part of the game, but what's poor is how obvious it was Dharmasena himself was unsure, he mouthed 'no' before giving it out, he clearly gave it out based on the appeal, which is not good umpiring. Roy had every right to be angry, no player likes to be given out, but it might prompt England to be more serious with their reviews in the future. He definitely deserved to be punished, his reactio was unacceptable, he dropped a few expletives and showed serious dissent. A ban was possible.

There should definitely be more than 1 review. I think 3 is a good number.
 
It wasn’t just a regular mistake by the umpire. Dharmasena initially mouthed “no” but then gave it out. It was very obvious that he was uncertain. What does an umpire do in this situation? He gives a soft signal and refers to the tv umpire for confirmation.

Dharmasena didn’t do that and he stuck to his decision even though he wasn’t certain. Any player in Roy’s position would be livid, let alone a batsman on the brink of a World Cup semi-final century.

Dharmasena has proved it time and time again that he is an incompetent umpire. I am sure even he doesn’t know what he’s doing in the elite panel.

That is for the ICC to decide. Jason Roy has no business making a scene out there on a WC stage like that.

Whether Dharmasena changed his mind midway or not, is irrelevant. Umpires are allowed to do that within a reasonable amount of time which is what he did. It doesn't matter whether his decision was right or wrong.

If the match was hanging in the balance, I would still understand Roy's reaction. But that was not the case. The result of the match was a forgone conclusion by then. Roy was simply concerned about his personal milestone which I have no sympathy for.

And again, I repeat - if Jason Roy didn't have a problem with a wrong cal from the umpire that saved his wickets in the match against India, then he should have been man enough to accept the decision in the SF as well. If not, then he should have walked in that match against India. But he didn't, did he?

If the bone of contention here is the quality of umpiring (which is why I assume you keep bringing up the Elite Panel) then Roy should have reacted in the same way in both those wrong calls. But he didn't. He was was picking and choosing to the highlight the umpire's error depending upon whether it was in favour of himself or against him.

That's shallow and deserves no defence.
 
Last edited:
When Roy was out against India and the umpire did not give out I didn’t see him walk.So it ok if umpire rule in his favour.
 
There should definitely be more than 1 review. I think 3 is a good number.

3 for 50 overs???????? You've got to be kidding me. May as well give them unlimited reviews. People like you clearly don't understand the point of why there is a limit. 1 unsuccessful review is enough for 50 overs, now that umpire's call leads to review being retained. It's up to teams not to waste reviews out of hope rather than expectation.
 
Exactly didnt see him cry then.

Did you guys not catch what he said on mic? F word..

Kids watchin world cup he should be banned..
 
Back
Top