Australia's controversial stumping of Jonny Bairstow, a breakdown 

In baseball one time, something unfortunate happened to a team on which Larry Bowa was a coach. The manager asked if there was a valid complaint to be made, and Bowa said no. You have to pay attention!

Makes me wish I'd played cricket with the man. He'd have been great!

Piers is just doing his darn best to stay relevant.

That and the fact that Jomboy's analysis is way better than the so called 'cricket tragic' Piers Morgan.

It's ironic that a brit who makes his money commentating on American politics would say that. What a jackass

Piers needs to stay quiet. Jomboy has done his research on this. As an Aussie and a long time cricket player and enjoyer of the game he is on point here.

for Piers, staying out of other's people's business is the uno reverse

You're not supposed to know the rules of cricket; that's the point. It's more baseball than baseball that way, and this is exactly what makes it so wonderful. You're literally going to enjoy it less once you know what's happening.

He doesn't understand it at all. *NOT. EVEN. REMOTELY. CLOSE.*

@@CinemaDemocratica Congratulations on making the most idiotic comment on RU-vid.

@@philsurtees ^ I kindly doubt it, but whatevvs.

​@@philsurtees, there is no worse gate keeper like a righteous cricket fan.

It's good to hear piers whingeing about something else than Prince Harry and Megan Merkel 😂😂

Seeing that tweet pop up on screen, in one breath I said “no fucking way that’s so cool, Piers Morgan shut fuck up”

Ah, Piers. Just another of the loud members of the "Rules Only Apply to Other People" crew. Hope Jomboy asked if, as an American, he was allowed to cover Arsenal bottling the league.

@@imightbebiased9311 😂😂😂😂

I just want to know what tf Morgan has to do with cricket. How this insufferable twat manages to insert himself in to everything is infuriating.

And specifically, it can not be against England at any point. If so, the whole club bringing it against them may, in fact, be a bunch of ninnies.

And it always seems to be England....

Correct. And it is out of place at the professional level. Play to the umpire, like every other professional sport on Earth.

This is why England never win any sports, because everyone else cheats

And this isn’t even against the “spirit of the game” it’s something that all wicket keepers do.

I think it took someone from a foreign country that doesn’t play the sport to make a balanced analysis because the beef is so deep between the two countries in question they would never come to an agreement. Fuck England btw.

Yeah he only missed/seemed to not understand batting out of the crease. The rest was spot on.

Yes, very well explained!

Apart from not understanding cricket at all it was fantastic.

Fours&sixes did a really good breakdown of it. Quite a small newish channel dedicated to cricket which I discovered because of this incident

Yeah he’s done a great job on his research to highlight the hypocrisy of their outrage

💯

Meet the poms. That's how they operate.

Not to mention the fact that it completely escapes them that the only reason it happen to them was that they had been trying it against the Aussies for quite a while.

100% agree!

Same same

Good on ya! What team do you follow in baseball?

Bunch of whingy whiny pricks man

Exactly. He was holding onto that for an eternity. That was the most bullshit decision in the history of the game imo.

The commentators I listened to said it was smart work by Carey.

Yep the Aussies like making things up to suit themselves

@@alopry11 I think you mean the english.....

As an American who knows nothing about cricket Australia is obviously in the right here…

The only part of this game that I understand/ understood was at the end when James said, "fuck off"... That's how I know he's spot on in this particular breakdown.

That's sad. Clearly 25 years isn't enough for you to have understand cricket properly. This was a disgrace.

@@benhaney9629 As an Australian who has been playing cricket for 50 years, Australia is obviously in the wrong here. I would never expect an American to understand that though - Americans cheat at anything and everything - but in cricket, as in life, just because you were within the letter of the law, that doesn't mean you were in the right. Bodyline, the underarm delivery against New Zealand, staying at the crease when you know you're out, this stumping, and plenty of other examples are all withing the rules, but they just aren't cricket, as the saying goes.

@@philsurtees agree to disagree.

The move by the [wicket keeper]. Great comparison also, very true.

Fucking A. We in America celebrate the greats like Ty Cobb and Jackie Robinson for plays just like this. We call it intelligence, gamesmanship, hustle… etc

​@benhaney9629 "humbug, I say! There's no room for any of that hogwash in Cricket!" -Piers Morgan, probably with extra indignant jowl waggling, undoubtedly 😆

Similar but also not at all. Baird tow isn’t tryna get an advantage of any kind in this

Yeah exactly this. The final shot that shows he threw it before Bairstow actually left is the key to everything here. Bairstow repeatedly paying zero attention created an opportunity and the keeper took it. My sense is that in a North American sports context the fans would be equally pissed about this BS out but they would direct their irritation at their own guy not the other team. "Why weren't you paying attention?!" Maybe that says something about the different sport cultures.

Haha! Written by F. Scott Fitzgerald, where "stumping" has something to do with jazz or bootleg liquor or something.

It is the 20s....

The English are Bad Sports with No Class!

The ball was dead, simple as.

​@@sonnyvarioni1654​@sonnyvarioni1654 why? The ball touching the keepers gloves doesn't make it dead pr else stumpings wouldn't be a thing especially stumpings like 7:17

Denial won't change the umpires decision.

@@sonnyvarioni1654 even if you're firmly on England's side here there is absolutely no argument the ball is dead. The wicket was taken fairly and within the laws of the game. The ONLY possible argument here is that the aussies should have recalled their appeal since its also clear that they did not beat bairstow with the ball. If thats the hill you want to die on, I can understand that. Trying to argue this was a dead ball however, is absurd.

exciting

Piers Morgan is a douche but he's right in this instance; the two incidents are not the same.

Yes, the Bairstow/Patel incident is truely incredible, not only because the slow nature makes it significantly more against ‘the spirit of cricket’ but also because of how positive and supportive the commentary is of it. The layers of irony in this whole ‘controversy’ have been hilarious.

Love the part where Ben "Spirit of the game" Stokes, in test 3 touched the boundary rope while gathering up a ball, and just let it slide when it wasn't called a 4.

@@zeropoint546 your point is irrelevant, that was so close to when he threw the ball and his arm touched the boundary... Its the same as a batsman not walking when he gets the faintest nick and doesn't feel it. Case and point Smith in the same innings reviewing his out cause he didn't know he had touched it. Then it gets reviewed by third umpire and so he assumes if it had touched before he threw the ball they would have called it.

@@domwicketts2036 Smith doesn't have "Spirit of cricket" as his middle name.

The real question is, when did the umpire call "Over"? The five angles doesn't give you that, you need the audio too. The umpire shouldn't have called over by that stage, but if he had mistakenly called it early, it would not be fair game.

@@amireallythatgrumpy6508 Read up on Law 23 Laws of Cricket.

One thing I find laughable, is I think it was the 2013 Ashes. Broad edged it, got ruled not out and stayed. The Aussies wined that it was against the spirit of the game to take advantage of the umpires like that. And the same English media commentators who defended Broad then are now whining that Carey violated the spirit of the game. I will say tho, I think the most convincing aspect for this was in Jomboys breakdown, something I missed watching it live (where I was more on the fence), was it was a fluid motion. Carey intended to try and stump Bairstow before he even caught the ball, and I think that puts it far more in line with the spirit of the game. Yeah, great breakdown from Johhny. Definitely a great analysis of it.

Everyone knows Australia is full of criminals, liars, and thieves…

@@Trepur349 leave it to the english to be as hypocritical as possible

spot on mate , spot on , laziness full stop

He lived in Australia for a few years, which is why he loves cricket so much, even though he's American, he got deep into it when he was over there, and has only got more and more into cricket in the years since then, especially because cricket is getting bigger in general in America (cos they've got a whole professional cricket league now, called Major League Cricket, with teams with cool arse names like the LA Knight Riders; I've always loved the thing Americans do of naming each team with a cool nickname instead of being boring like us Europeans and just calling them things like "Atlanta Football Club" instead of the badass name Atlanta Falcons, and so on. It's not the new York baseball club, it's the new York YANKEES, and so on). Anyway yeah Jomboy has a very sophisticated understanding of the unwritten complexities of cricket, the psychological battles that are constantly going on. He understands it better than any other brit I know, even more than myself. I've gone to many county cricket matches in my life, mostly Essex county cricket club matches cos my dad lives in Chelmsford. But anyway yeah, he's not just got a deep understanding of it for an American, he's got a deep understanding of it in general. Most brits don't understand it as well as Jomboy. He's just got a complex understanding of sports in general and a lot of these insights can he easily applied to different sports. Jomboy is technically a sports journalist, so it makes sense why he knows all of this stuff.

did you find cricket interesting and like it

Jomboy to do weekly reviews of upcoming Major League Cricket??

@@nishantsharma6779I enjoy cricket. The USA team is brutally bad but I still enjoyed the One Day International World Championship qualifiers. Watched almost every game.

@@Nick-xu7ns are you native American or any relation with test playing nation people

@@nishantsharma6779 no I’m born and raised boring white boy from the USA. I don’t mind test cricket. I just have a hard time finding it as exciting as ODI until the last day. I know a lot of people only like test though, so maybe one day I’ll get to that point too.

Had he done anything that you agree with? 🤔

always a good sign when Piers disagrees with you

Technically he is sort of Irish if you wanna disown him but let's not cause a diplomatic incident 🤣

Yes and no. I respected him for facing up to the consequences of his words when he faced Brett Lee in the nets. He showed a lot of courage.

Don't be upset about it, there's people from every country that their fellow citizens aren't proud of.

I am guessing you are cool with an mankad as well.... and also sandpaper?

@@BenKickert Mankad is legal dismissal so Mankad every day. Sandpaper is not the damn same and thats illegal.

@@BenKickert The sandpaper debacle led to the biggest bans Australia has ever given out but whatever

@@BenKickert are you cool with the non striker getting a Headstart on the running?

@@XaviRonaldo0 No I am not. Which is why a classy player will warn the non-striker or faint a mankad. If the runner keeps doing it (which they never do), then a mankad would be justified and well within the spirit of the game.

Right, there was no reason to think the ball was still live here.

@@jonescrusher1 Aside from Carey keeping it alive, sure

@@jonescrusher1 Another delusional pom. There's no reason to assume the ball is dead there, only Bairstow the numbnut did so.

Good point

@@THICCTHICCTHICC And how is it usually ascertained that a ball is dead or alive?

You should make a video of all the "worst things" Broad has done lol

You can’t say nobody when I disagree. Umpire wasn’t even paying attention, shoulda been the end of the over.

Nah, I think the point is more the aussies were going to likely win the ashes anyway so it was all a bit of an unnecessary thing for them to do, they have given the English a gift here in PR terms

@@esard2011 nope

it's funny when I tuned into the game, the English broadcasters were mocking the situation and when Root or the other guys followed the procedure (look back at the keeper, wait for the ball to be dead, raise your hand before leaving the crease... you know the stuff you learn as a kid) and saying, that's how it's done. I was surprised, because English fans were crying all week long

Cricket is more relaxed about the ball "going dead" because there are no baserunners, stolen bases, tag-ups or double plays. After each delivery you'll see the batters talking to each other and walking up and down. Obviously Bairstow was a little *too* relaxed...

Bairstow is known as a bit of a doofus and often does things that make people shake their head. He's also a terrible keeper who dropped multiple catches yesterday on the first day of the third test. One in particular was an inexcusable drop at the level.

The exact same scenario as you mention happened in the Australia v Japan WBC game earlier this year..runner made second but momentarity changed feet on the base and was tagged out...

The idea of a "trick play" like in baseball with a hidden ball or a fake throw to get someone when they step off the bag is really "not cricket". The idea is that you beat the bat with the ball, youre supposed to beat the batsmans skill with skill and so taking a wicket in a "low skill" way where very clearly bairstow was not beaten by the ball is sometimes considered against the "spirit" of the game. If bairstow had have been out of his crease to gain an advantage, i.e. better position to play the ball, or his momentum took him out of the crease. If him leaving the crease was "part of the shot" then there is no question hes been beaten. In this case he clearly wasn't. At the same time you are correct, he needs to have the presence of mind to wait for the ump to call over, or ask the ump to leave his crease to inspect the pitch. It's a tough one really. I think that aus are both right to have taken this wicket, and also that its an unfortunate way to go on to win a match

@@PeekayIP Known as a but if a doofus? What are you talking about?

I don't think it was a brain fade... questionable technique not looking at the ball, and an assumption that wiping your foot in the crease is enough for everyone else to consider the ball dead. If it was a one off, it's a brain fade... he was doing that over and over.

@@har234908234 He foolishly trusted the Aussies not to be complete and utter dicks. It was nothing like his attempted stumping of Labuschagne and I do not believe for a second that Carey thinks it was. Labuschagne had stepped out of his crease to play the ball and Bairstow was hoping he would lift his trailing foot. Bairstow was well in his crease, in control of his feet and from any practical point of view the play was over.

@@nerdyali4154 Did you even watch the video? There is no "they were dicks about it" that's bullshit, Bairstow's dismissal of Patel was far more egregious in this regard and no one went off at him about it. The simple fact is that if play is over as soon as the ball passes the batsmen then stumping a player out would not be a thing. Bairstow was stupid and presented his wicket to the Aussies on a platter, end of really. They are professionals and in any sport you play to the umpire's call not just "whenever I feel like it."

@@nerdyali4154 wahhhhhhh.

@@nerdyali4154 go read the Laws of Cricket to learn why you are wrong.

Yeah. Ben Stokes is a legend and that hasn't changed, but the interview after this made him sound like a sore loser. Other than that it's been a great series to watch!

This probably wouldn't have been as controversial if there hadn't been all the BS about the Mitchell Starc catch-non-catch the previous day. It then means tempers were fit to flare up. And of course Stuart Broad coming out and being very theatrical when he was already fired up didn't exactly help cooler heads prevail. Although tbh I think England got closer to winning that game than they would have done had Bairstow still been there, because the way that Stokes fired up after that dismissal completely changed the way he was batting and I don't think England would have played that way while Bairstow and Stokes were still there, but I also don't think England were good enough to win the game regardless.

Dude piss off 😅

Orioles have a bloody good young team

As an Aussie cricket and baseball fan (Yankee fan too) I wholeheartedly agree.

Same, but as an O's fan it's just nice to have two great things come back-to-back :D

And a certain underarm ball?

I can’t believe jomboy has international appeal. If u want to go into a hobbit rabbit whole, look how he blew the whistle on a entire baseball team cheating for an entire yr who , look up “jomboy astros cheating scandal”. Totally fascinating

I bet McCullum didn't want him to withdraw the appeal too

@@XaviRonaldo0 McCullum is one of the most ruthless players ever so yeah

@@THICCTHICCTHICC peanut brained yeah

That incident was in response to the earlier Grant Elliott / Ryan Sidebottom incident. Kiwis were proving a point. They all knew the appeal would be withdrawn.

But it’s ok now for Callum, he made a speech to the MCC expressing remorse for stumping Murali, when he was celebrating a century.. if he could take it back he would have.. so that now gives him the right to criticise Cummins 😂

played both games in Australia and the one thing i know 110% , cricket balls are harder and hurt heaps more i reckon lol

Also, any advantage there is balanced by the fact he has even less time to react to the ball movement, line or length. If you're facing a quick, you don't have much time anyway, less than a second I believe.

It's not gaining advantage to stand out of your crease when batting, it's changing your technique to deal with the conditions presented. Same as taking a different guard, switch hitting or batting deeper in the crease.

@@sentimentalbloke185 He didn't do it to not gain an advantage. Cheers for the year later reply though!

@@andrewmclean834 there's no advantage to be gained or everyone would do it & gain an advantage. It's the same as changing your guard or your stance or your backswing, adjusting for the conditions.

Exactly that is the reason it's always crucial for the ball to be called dead only after the keeper made his move.

There is implicit and explicit calling of 'over' - explicit, is the actually calling out 'over', implicit is the body language of everyone concerned, the umpires looking/ walking away, Johnny marking his crease and walking up to garden and chat, obviously not trying to gain an advantage...unlike the Mankad, in which the non striking batsman is trying to gain an advantage by backing up, but even here to take a wicket with a Mankad is considered against the spirit of the game, at least without warning the batsman first beforehand. It's like the time the batsman was given out for handling the ball, when having played the delivery and trapped the ball near his feat he picked the ball up and threw it to the nearest fielder, to save time. Technically 'out' for handling the ball, but was the ball dead at the time it was picked up? In any case, to answer your question, if the wicket keeper doesn't catch the ball cleanly and it keeps moving then it is obviously still a live ball, and 4 byes will be added if it reaches the boundary. The only argument would be as to whether the batsman had actually played shot, as if not then the ball would be considered dead and the byes would not then be added.

​@@forestgump99That's a too biased subjective explanation. The Sambit Patel wicket in this video suggests that he didn't take any advantage either. How Bairstow and English commentary hailed it. The only difference here is Carrey was at a distance. But atleast he instantly thrown the ball unlike Bairstow. Bairstow scratching wickets can't be considered as the " ball dead". Umpires need to call over. My point is what if Carrey didn't catch the ball. It will roll to boundary and England will get 4 runs. Bairstow scratching his crease didn't make the ball dead in that scenario and umpires will Signal 4. Bairstow was living in a parallel world that time. That's why the look on his face like " oh my god I am screwed" when the ball hits the stumps . Because he himself tried the same before and knew he was out. 😅

​@@forestgump99Why Bairstow was silent all along. Because he knows he is not a saint and stumped other batters like that . 😂

With the Patel stumping, the batsman's weight was still forward, he hadn't technically completed the stroke because of this, so the stumping was fair. If the batsman's weight had returned backwards such that he was standing in a balanced manner then the argument would be different.

The rule in question is, is the ball in play or a "dead ball" (not in play/the sort of dead space between balls). Put simply the rule says - the ball is dead the moment everyone stops playing, so in this case the batsman had stoped playing, but the wicketkeeper (catcher) kept playing - meaning the ball was not dead, and bairstow was out. Cricket has a sort of appendix to the rules which is "the spirit of cricket" (some of witch is written down, and some of which is a kinda vague idea of how to behave) which is a sort of conduct code to discourage bad sportsmanship in the game -because of this there are a few ways that you can get a batter out that are quite unusual - basically anything that is a bit clever/cheeky is frowned upon. So with this debate it is definitely out according to the rules, but people are arguing weather it was bad sportsmanship or not.

@@azazaz999990question then… if the English think this is bad sportsmanship..why is what he did when the one dudes foot was barely off the ground not bad sportsmanship? It seems like he got a win off something clever and now he got a loss off someone else being clever and he and his whole country are being pissy about it even though when he did something similar he was celebrated? Seems kinda whiny to me.

Kind of, there is still definitely a "spirit of the game" culture in America. But we seem to follow the "don't hate the player, hate the game" motto a lot more. If a player is doing something against the spirit of the game, it sucks for their first opponent, but they definitely get free reign to continue to do it until the league changes the rules.

Americans hate flopping though. In both Futbol and Basketball…

@@janitorizamped a guy throwing a beamer due to personal grudges can get permanently suspended and can jeapordise the whole team, especially the captain and the coach. I guess that's why people are so chill, imagine having an umpire like Bucknor and still not rioting.

@@someonejustsomeone1469 ?

Excepted 😂

Cricket has long been a gentleman's game... compare to their football. There's definitely sportsmanship in American sports but it's different... subtle - even in baseball where they can't shake hands!

​@@har234908234look who's playing cricket. It's not a gentlemen's game.

English media is the worst on god

And everyone in Australia was willing to hand over Greg Chappell. You only need to see Rod Marsh's reaction to Greg Chappell telling his brother Trevor to bowl it to know that it was not even a popular decision in the Australian team.

@@TurboRampage Yeah, the best solution would've been for the (then) ACB to apologize, sack Chappell and give the captaincy to Rod Marsh.

The ball that gave new meaning to “underhanded tactic”…

Test cricket is the only cricket

And what's worse, you have people like Geoffrey Boycott who, on Piers Morgan's show, claimed that the Aussies were to blame for Bodyline! I mean, that's hard to fathom even for an Indian like me with no real context in that debate.

@@arvindhmani06 The only way we were to blame was that Don Bradman was too good.

which makes it so much funnier when the scumlish start to mention things like "spirit of the game" unaware that the spirit all originated from england violating the at the time unwritten laws.

@@arvindhmani06 it's a miracle BCCI said nothing about it.

As an Indian who hated past Australian teams for their sledging and win by hook or crook methods, I was supporting Australia after I saw that clip of Carrey's Stumping. I thought it's an intelligent work by Carrey and may be he planned it after watching Bairstow carelessly walking out of the crease without looking at the ball. The hypocrisy of poms annoys me now. They have been using technical rules to their advantage ( Even winning a world cup on boundary count even after getting 6 undeserving runs) to Bairstow trying this same stumping when Australia batted. Australian media rightly called poms as "crybabies". 😅

Yo be fair the Aussies have a better team all round then the English ...should win it 5-0 easily ...best test side Vs one ageing one ...no contest

​​@@alopry11 so you didn't watch any of the games then, because both were contests. both went to the final hour.