You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
The unsavoury business with the ghastly colonials got me thinking that each sport seems to have its own bete noire, a crime so heinous that it indelibly stains the character and legacy of the perpetrators. in no order:
Cricket - ball tampering.
Football - spitting.
Rugby - eye gouging.
Golf - replacing ones ball on the green in a different place than you picked it up.
Road cycling- attacking a GC contender when he's having a piss or puncture.
What other equivalents are there?
Wire bushes on grit
Sucker punching or slew footing (kicking a players skate from under them) in Ice Hockey would probably be up there.
Yes or crashing the goalie in ice hockey
Ditto for ball tampering in baseball or throwing at the batters head.
Fumbling the batten exchange in the relay.
biting ears in a boxing match
Underarm bowling in cricket.
Getting someone to whack your opponent with a hammer in ice skating?
The "Hopoate Manoeuvre".
Nasty.
interesting subject; one they covered (a bit) on R5 last night. Flintoff and Savage couldn't find agreement about why walking or not isn't considered in the same vein as diving for a penalty in football.
- the person involved has a pretty good idea whether they hit it / were fouled or not
- whatever their reaction, there's a person there to actually judge on it
- the 'penalty' for both is similar order of magnitude; a goal in football is of similar importance to a wicket in cricket
(and I know at the top level DRS and in time VAR will assist in this)
But walking (or rather not) isn't particularly considered cheating; on the flip side fielding teams will appeal for a nick that they aren't sure of (or even in some cases know wasn't a nick) and happily let the man in the white coat decide and take the wicket if it's given. How's that so different to 'going down' in football and letting the ref decide? Yet it's an outrage in football.
There was also an interesting anecdote re Michael Owen; in a game he was touched / fouled in the penalty area, didn't go down, chance was lost and the ref (respected Pierluigi Collina) said to him words to the effect that if he wants a penalty then he needs to go down. Owen later memorably dived vs Argentina and got a penalty.
Back to the main subject - in cricket claiming a catch that hasn't carried gets the anger up quite a lot; even more than claiming one where the batter never hit ii in the first place! Odd when you analyse it.
I've got one of Kevin Keegan on my left buttock
How’s that so different to ‘going down’ in football and letting the ref decide? Yet it’s an outrage in football.
In cricket, you have to appeal or the umpire won't make a decision.
Rugby union - bloodgate
Golf - walking across the line of the opponent's potential putt after you're finished on that hole
Yes, but I mean appealing for stuff you know isn't out, in the hope the umpire makes a mistake.
Wearing anything more that a football shirt at Newcastle in December ....
And as per the Collina anecdote, going down is the same as appealing, at that point you force him to make a decision
Brake-testing in motor-racing
Yes, but I mean appealing for stuff you know isn’t out, in the hope the umpire makes a mistake.
Yeah, that's cheating.
And as per the Collina anecdote, going down is the same as appealing, at that point you force him to make a decision
It's the same as appealing when you know it isn't out. But the bigger problem is the crappy way in which football is refereed. We can hardly expect players to stay on their feet if their reward is to be denied a legitimate penalty.
Yes Boxing - loaded gloves.
Snooker - match fixing.
Toyota air intakes in WRC iirc.
F1 has various attempts at maximising aero and engine type - but the taboo is more the moving rules and ganging up against Innovation at times..
Yes it's cheating but that's the point. It's sort of accepted, part of the game. There's the definite nicks that everyone knows is out but some batters will still stand there until the umpire says so.
There's the definite not outs, but teams appeal knowing it was thigh pad or jumper or whatever, and if given they don't say 'hang on Ump' (I did in a Surrey Championship game once, down the leg side and off the jumper, big deflection but clearly not bat - and got a sound bollocking off the skipper at tea - 'bowlers bowl, batters bat, umpires umpire' )
And then a myriad grey areas, which might be and it's then up to the umpire (with the benefit of doubt supposedly to the batter, rightly)
Whereas a similar level of 'cheating' in football - players get reputations, hate mail, fingers wagged at them by other players, referees become less inclined to believe them based on prior experience, etc.
That's the point - why is it accepted in the 'gentlemanly' sport but hated in football?
matt_outandabout
Subscriber
Toyota air intakes in WRC iirc.F1 has various attempts at maximising aero and engine type – but the taboo is more the moving rules and ganging up against Innovation at times..
I don't think that's regarded as cheating in F1, finding creative solutions to the limitations in the rules is all part of the fun.
I think taboos in F1 are things like Alonso purposely holding up Hamilton in his pitstop in his rookie season so he couldn't do his fast lap for qualy, or the Alonso/Piquet crashgate thing.
Golf - The leather wedge.
The thing is in football going down isn't by and large what's done making sure you fall when actually fouled is derided [i]sometimes[/i] because of the theatre but by and large accepted. Often though, they're not asking the ref for a decision or highlighting a foul, they're throwing them selves around and play acting and trying to get the opposition penalised for a perfectly sound tackle, (the upshot is all taking a tumble is seen as diving). This is the same with an uncarried catch, you're not inviting the umpire to say catch or no, you're saying something happened which patently didn't. Same with fake blood in RU.
In cricket and rugby particularly, Gamesmanship isn't seen as a bad thing and is distinct from cheating, it's perfectly reasonable to slow things right down in the 75th minute and wait for time, in football that's hated. In cricket it's expected to put pace in against the tail end and rough people up a bit, to sledge and so on because making your opponent loose is a viable alternative to winning. Playing ugly but tactical football, even when you win, only seems acceptable when massively outclassed.
In cricket it’s expected to put pace in against the tail end and rough people up a bit, to sledge and so on because making your opponent loose is a viable alternative to winning.
only in the modern helmet and body armour era. Before that, if you were a bowler and didn't fancy facing the quicks they would happily bowl at your stumps and leave the body alone, while you kept your feet completely still and threw the bat at it.
biting ears in a boxing match
biting ears in a crown green bowling tournament.
Think the answer lies in the "goal in football similar to wicket in cricket"
No probs from anyone about appealing for either. Video technology is makeing it less of a grey area, but if there's a question over whether a goal s been scored then appealing is fine.
Wicket and goal are both an appeal about something positive achieved.
Big difference about a penalty appeal is that it's essentially a claim that the opponent has cheated and the foul play should be punished. Including punished by expulsion from the game.
Doing that is different, and a false claim is getting towards slanderous. Would be more like claiming to an umpire that the opponent's are ball tampering. When they're not. It's a malicious false claim that the opponent has cheated to gain an advantage from their punishment.
For me the biggest taboo is cheating to lose (i.e. match fixing or any of its various derivatives around spot betting).
People have done horrible, horrible things whilst cheating to win and this has obvious corrosive effects on the viability and believability of a sport, but nothing is as corrosive as the suspicion that one or more participants may have been actively underperforming to lose in return for payment.
It destroys the possibility of the David v Goliath triumph being viewed with joy as the suspicion hangs there.
The ****stan cricket team lost to (I think) Kenya, Ireland and Bangladesh in various group games at world cups. Amazing stories, but now......given the stuff that has come to light.....?
A lot of England cricketers are most bitter about the Cape Town test that Hansie Cronje manipulated to get a result. There they were, all leaping around and celebrating what seemed to be a brilliant win and a throwback to an earlier age of cavalier declarations and it turns out they were being manipulated. I wouldn't appreciate that.
There was some chat on the radio about what was and wasn't acceptable across the various sports.
To me, the issue is always what's in the rules. There was talk about TUEs being used for marginal gain - to me that's OK, it was within the rules, if you don't like it retrospectively you need to tighten up the rules for next season.
Something like F1 (and cycling) constant attempts to use every last bit of the rules is fine - it's an equipment sport, and there will be appeals, there's no shame in having to take that bit off or redesign it because they've clarified the rules. I seem to remember there was some controversy about certain skinsuits and whether they met the "no aerodynamic aids" bit of the clothing rules - a catch all meant to mean you can't put massive fairings in, but should the bobbles and textures on modern skin suits be allowed?
It's all part of the fun really. But it does get people excited when someone is seen as a cheat, especially in today's social meedja filled world.
Deflategate - american footballers letting their balls down
What, no mention of TUEs?
Always amuses me when xyz footballer comes out with the "I'd rather someone broke my leg/ankle/spine with a bad tackle than spat on me" line whenever it occurs.
Really? A bit of gos on one's exterior isn't very pleasant, but I'd take it over hospitalisation any day!