Chappelli: ICC needs to clamp down on sledging.

Yep I know Chappelli again.

Interesting that it sounds hypocritical. Nonetheless his point is that in days of yore there were comments made in the heat of the battle but increasingly there is this orchestrated campaign to sledge which players are saying his part and parcel of the game.

He puts to the rule book where this certainly is not enshrined.

He believes that a batsman is entitled to peace and quiet and was pleased that Anderson was the only one with the gumption to query the right of the fielders to constantly chirp at them. He said that if he was out there now he would start chirping the bowler as he runs in which case he would be told by the umpire that he can't do that. He would then point out that the he as a batsman has an equal right to full concentration. Alternatively he would pull out and tell the fieldsmen that it will be a long day because he won't face up until they shut up.

He said the two toughest bowlers he faced were John Snow and Andy Roberts and they never said a word to him yet some players today have this view that if they sledge they're tough.

Fair dinkum, I haven't seen this many oars in the water all at once since the Head of the goddam River....

Are they sledging during the bowler's run up?

taipan wrote:Are they sledging during the bowler's run up?

No but his point is that the bowler is sacrosanct but the batsman isn't.

Red wrote:

taipan wrote:Are they sledging during the bowler's run up?

No but his point is that the bowler is sacrosanct but the batsman isn't.

Since when?

Red wrote:

taipan wrote:Are they sledging during the bowler's run up?

No but his point is that the bowler is sacrosanct but the batsman isn't.

Actually Pup pulled away a couple of times during his 2nd innings because of exactly that. The short leg was chirping as the bowler was running in. Both times Pup looked around at the short leg, then at Cook at 1st slip. Not sure if anything was said in the wake of the step back but I imagine there was.

When are they going to start sledging umpires - all in favour of a good, virile, no-holds-barred game, like?


Chappell is dead right.

As was Graeme Smith.

It should have been dealt with at least 20 years ago.


Even "basic" sledging is an unacceptable liberty, disrespect AND gamesmanship, in that it is a deliberate attempt to distract the batsman.

Would YOU accept that in your everyday work?

And cricket is a profession in which split-seconds count. Would you like someone continually yapping in your ear that you're a QUNT, (etc etc - fill in the tiresome but effective gaps) while you're, say, driving in traffic?

When it gets to personal abuse, it is far worse, it is inflammatory, there is also something of contempt, degradation, hatred about it ... it has nothing (acceptable) to do with sport, and it should be followed up in the courts of the country of the offence or the offender.


Ribaldry, badinage, leg-pulling, give and take .... all good, all hearty parts of the game of cricket as it unfolds. But that is not what this is about.

Distraction, disrespect, gamesmanship - inflammatory provocation, contempt, degradation, hatred - is what's at issue.

Chappell is dead right. As was Smith.

Personally, I'm not bothered and I wouldn't be if I were being sledged. However, I don't see it as a necessary tool to use - from a distance it just looks pathetic. But I haven't seen how sledges have affected certain players.

PeterCS wrote:When are they going to start sledging umpires - all in favour of a good, virile, no-holds-barred game, like?


Chappell is dead right.

As was Graeme Smith.

It should have been dealt with at least 20 years ago.


Even "basic" sledging is an unacceptable liberty, disrespect AND gamesmanship, in that it is a deliberate attempt to distract the batsman.

Would YOU accept that in your everyday work?

And cricket is a profession in which split-seconds count. Would you like someone continually yapping in your ear that you're a QUNT, (etc etc - fill in the tiresome but effective gaps) while you're, say, driving in traffic?

When it gets to personal abuse, it is far worse, it is inflammatory, there is also something of contempt, degradation, hatred about it ... it has nothing (acceptable) to do with sport, and it should be followed up in the courts of the country of the offence or the offender.


Ribaldry, badinage, leg-pulling, give and take .... all good, all hearty parts of the game of cricket as it unfolds. But that is not what this is about.

Distraction, disrespect, gamesmanship - inflammatory provocation, contempt, degradation, hatred - is what's at issue.

Chappell is dead right. As was Smith.

The Graeme Smith comment has always been misread. He was asked if he was sledged. He acknowledged the fact but added he have it back. It has been misrepresented for years. Something like the Botham/Marsh comment elsewhere.

Chappelli pontificating on sledging.
Now there's a rareity worth savouring!

True story -
A mate of mine (no names) was drafted into the Kent team which was playing the Aussie tourists back in the 70's, captained by Chappelli.
A batsman who later went on to do well in CC for the next 10 years (before packing it in and starting up his own company), this was his first gig against a touring party.
Batting at 4, he played and missed several times at their quick, thus enduring the barrage of verbal from Chappelli and his cohorts in the slips.
Finally as he did so once again, he heard a finger click behind him as the ball passed his bat an inch away . . .  two slips and the keeper rose as one and the Umps finger went up.
"You can f**k off now mate - thanks for coming".

Guess who uttered those words?

Yep - the one and only Chappelli.

A batsman's entitled to peace and quiet - you're having a laugh Ian ol' son.

In 1997 Andy Oram debuted for Notts against Australia

He batted at 11 and asked the ump for "one leg" as he prepared to face McGrath

The umpire replied "Are you sure?" and then added "Dont worry ...you wont see it anyway"

He reckons the Ozzies were too busy laughing at the umpire's sledging to worry about sledging him

Jones hit back at Chappelli tonight saying he agrees with the sledging tactics. Interesting that Chappell doesn't mind the witty banter but doesn't believe in mental disintegration tactics. Of course with Steve Waugh being usually regarded as responsible for these concerted campaigns it's hardly surprising he's not enamoured of this strategy.

For the last three days there has been an MCG-size hole in this mass-debate, and it turns out to be exactly the same shape as Dean Jones. TF he showed up - now the jigsaw is complete.

Course Jones is a fairly common name - so it was probably another Dean Jones who was responsible for the Curtley's Sweatbands affair, the most disastrously unsuccessful sledge ever.

... until he sledged Hashim Amla's beard.

Yeah - Cook needs to take heed of that - and make it very clear that when they get to Adelaide the first moron to sledge Johnno's mo rows back to England.

Has Boycott got involved yet?

One thing they should get into the dreaded Warner about is, why TF does he still answer to 'Davey' when he's, what, 26 years old?

Who was the last before him - Crockett???

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Davey_Boy_Smith

When Steve Waugh sledged it was mental disintegration. And to be fair to him he backed it up by staring down Curtly Ambrose in his pomp.

When tough guys Michael Clarke and George Bailey sledge it's when Aus are 400 runs ahead and Jimmy Anderson, a complete rabbit, is batting. Clarke has really just made himself look foolish. He's lost 4 out of 6 Ashes Tests as captain (should have been 5 but he begged and whimpered to the umpires and then resorted to Alastair Cook tactics of bowling 10 overs an hour). He'll look very foolish come January if Aus go on to lose.

As for Bailey, who the **** is he? He can't even bat in the Sheffield Shield, never mind in proper cricket. For him to be that close to Jimmy Anderson on a cricket field he should be asking for an autograph, that's all he has the right for.

Anderson himself can be a mouthy git, but I remember him sledging Peter Fulton, he never tried to threaten Chris Martin. Going after the number 11 and ignoring the good batsmen reveals insecurity.

c'mon Gary...nice defence of Jimmeh but the lad does dish it out himself and should cop it sweet which he has done...

funny comments re George who is an honest trier at best at Shield level but seems a pretty decent bloke

apparently the Pom management are seeking clarification of 'intimidatory bowling' - in clear lobbying to limit bouncers...seems to me the rules are pretty clear - 2 balls above shoulder height are allowed per over..

this whimpering from pom management does little for their standing or the confidence of their players...the pomgolian batting line-up clearly is well of our strinos

Jimmy does like to dish out verbals, but I don't see it as any different to Glenn McGrath or Merv Hughes. They used to bait batsman just like Jimmy does. But McGrath used to target the likes of Athers, Hussain, Sarwan, just like Jimmy has gone for Rogers or Two Meter Peter.

Like I said, I don't remember Anderson targeting tailenders like Martin or Nathan Lyon, just like McGrath didn't go after Tufnell or Gough. There's no need to.

I think it says more about the respective weakness of the fielders if they ignore say Cook but go hard at our number 11.

By all means say "If Anderson dishes it out then he should take it", but do that when he's performing his main skill, bowling. Being quiet when the match is in the balance then Having a go at a hapless number 11 when the match is over isn't what the Aussie's used to do when they had a champion team.

As for Bailey, well he clearly started the whole incident. Verbals from short leg as the bowler us running in is annoying and unsporting. A player on debut should show more respect.

But similar to Warner really - when Oz needed him this Summer he did eff all. Then he gets a few runs in the second innings when his bowlers have already set up the game and he's facing declaration bowling and he's already shooting his mouth off.

I think England will really struggle this series, but if Aussie don't win from here a number of them will have egg on their faces.

I think re: Anderson and sledging, you've missed another key point, Gary.

It's also the nature of the sledging. The kind of language. And its timing.

Gary 111 wrote:When Steve Waugh sledged it was mental disintegration. And to be fair to him he backed it up by staring down Curtly Ambrose in his pomp.

When tough guys Michael Clarke and George Bailey sledge it's when Aus are 400 runs ahead and Jimmy Anderson, a complete rabbit, is batting. Clarke has really just made himself look foolish. He's lost 4 out of 6 Ashes Tests as captain (should have been 5 but he begged and whimpered to the umpires and then resorted to Alastair Cook tactics of bowling 10 overs an hour). He'll look very foolish come January if Aus go on to lose.

As for Bailey, who the **** is he? He can't even bat in the Sheffield Shield, never mind in proper cricket. For him to be that close to Jimmy Anderson on a cricket field he should be asking for an autograph, that's all he has the right for.

Anderson himself can be a mouthy git, but I remember him sledging Peter Fulton, he never tried to threaten Chris Martin. Going after the number 11 and ignoring the good batsmen reveals insecurity.

It's suddenly like Jimmy has become a god. Oddly enough if you look at the bowling stats, Broad has the better average.

Cricket would be more popular if they reduced the sledging, for one it would encourage outlying countries like China or Japan who are on the fringes in Cricket but participate much more in baseball. (there is even a Japanese league for baseball).

Cricket has been reduced to a rednecks vs hobos mudbath by the culture of constant sledging in matches involving Aus & Eng. It does nothing to popularise the game. The game was at it's most popular when the West Indies were around to provide an added dimension of racial hubris but when they died down and the game got back to it's 'core values' it basically meant that it would never gain in popularity again nor would it expand to include newer countries.

the only downside to curbing sledging is that the the sport may lose whatever fan base left in both these countries, because it is exactly the crowd that is fascinated by a sledging match between the two groups that is attracted to the game any more. Shows cricket in poor light, but it is also a truth.