Guys did u know Adam Gilchrist revealed the secret that he kept a squash ball in his glove in the finals?

Question

Isnt it unfair???Gilchrist revealed that the only secret behind his success in the finals was the fact that he kept a squash ball inside the glove in order to obtain a perfect grip which eventually led him to thrash sri lankan bowlers.Dont u think its unfair???All these days i was wondering how that form came to him on that day and now only i realize the reason.Too bad and very unfair.

What do u think??Go to this link and see what gilchrist said

http://cricketworldcup.indya.com/DisplayArticleDetails.asp?xf=news,Cricket,2007,April,News_20070429_220

GREG W you are asking why I say that it was not fair.Come on!Wts this when anything new is done by a non australian or a non british everybody pokes their nose to the middle and accuse.Why not a for an australian??When its done by an aussieee no questions asked and where did it say that he got the approval from the ICC???OH even if he got it its not a thing to get surprised since we all know ICC is dominated by aussiees(MALCOM SPEED and many more)

But just think about this.When Hansie tried new things it became a huge issue.Am I wrong??Just imagine if this squash ball thing was tried by a player from a sub continent team in the finals and brought victory.Do you expect OZ s and other european decendants to keep their mouths shut?

Dont take this hard!Most of the asians too accept whatever dont by the OZs.

Answer 1

I think when "Gill" drank some fluids which
brought by Autralian reserved player,
might have given him this power hitting ability


Gichrist did illegal thing
me think when "Gilcriss drank some fluids which
brought by Autralian reserved player,
might have given him this big hitting power
Law 3 (6) (c) (i) specifically prohibits a player from using equipment other than that permitted. And nowhere in cricket’s 42 laws is there a mention of a squash ball as a permitted item.

sri lanka could have won under better circustances,

if it was a 50 over match
if the weather was better.

this was the only match in the world cup it wasnt 50 overs. they should have postponed it for the next day or a day the weather was good.

Ultimately....rain & light chaos prevented
Sri Lanka from winning the World cup 2007
still some fans demand srilakns
shut their mouth about this UNJUST....
At least these fans ~criss and ~sord rox and lara king~
doing something against this ~disgusting unjust
thanx again guys
we dont worship Kangaroos
we worship .. only god

Answer 2

The law specifically prohibits a player from using equipment other than that permitted. And nowhere in cricket's 42 laws is there a mention of a squash ball as a permitted item. If Dennis Lilee's aluminium bat and Ricky Ponting's graphite-coated bat could be deemed illegal, if Hansie Cronje's earpiece experiment was not OK, if Scott Styris had to remove all the bandage from his right hand before he could bowl in the super eight match, can Adam Gilchrist's 'hidden ball' pass muster? No law can, of course, take the sheen away from Gilchrist's knock. Batting with a normal grip against the world's best bowlers is tough enough, batting with a squash ball in one of your gloves is worse. To score 149 scintillating runs is, well, incredible. Still, two questions arise: If using a squash ball isn't ok as per the laws of the game, is his innings legal and does it count? And if it doesn't count, can Australia claim to have won a hopelessly one-sided and farcical victory?

Answer 3

Law 3 of cricket deals with the umpires. Subsection 6 of law 3 deals with the conduct of the game, implements and equipment. It reads as under:

Before the toss and during the match, the umpires shall satisfy themselves that

(a) the conduct of the game is strictly in accordance with the Laws.

(b) the implements of the game conform to the requirements of Laws 5 (the ball) and 6 (the bat), together with either Laws 8.2 (size of stumps) and 8.3 (the bails) or, if appropriate, Law 8.4 (junior cricket).

(c) (i) no player uses equipment other than that permitted.

(ii) the wicket-keeper’s gloves comply with the requirements of Law 40.2 (gloves).

The well-known Karnataka umpire M.R. Suresh, citing Tom Smith’s New Cricket Umpiring and Scoring, the manual on the implementation of cricket’s laws that umpires use, says the list of permitted external items for a batsman are a helmet, leg guards (pads), hand gloves and, if visible, fore arm guards.

Spectacles and jewellery are classified under clothing items.

Gilchrist’s squash ball was, therefore, neither a piece of protective equipment, nor a clothing item, and was most certainly not visible to either side or the umpires.

In other words, Law 3 (6) (c) (i) specifically prohibits a player from using equipment other than that permitted. And nowhere in cricket’s 42 laws is there a mention of a squash ball as a permitted item.

Answer 4

Varun Da,

Tell me from whom did they get the permission to use squash ball? Do you know previous attempts by Lillee, Styris, Cronjie and others introduced various devices to help them win, and all were disallowed! Checkout the artical in www.andhracafe.com

Aussies knew they could not defeat Sri Lanka without using external support, that's why they use it. That was the biggest turning point for Aussie win. Hadn't squash ball helped Gill to score 149, they would ended up in lower score. Which Sri Lankan could achieve despite the bad weather and lighting. Sri Lankan have proved earlier that they can turn around the outcome of a match by fighting till the last moment. This is totally unfair and cheating. Not a genuine win.

Hey CHRIS H. below,

Can you post this same info in bbc.com, cricket, under "Aussie joy cut through...". that way it can be seen by more community. Also please drop a email at ICC and cricinfo website under "contact" Thanks and good job.

Answer 5

why is everything unfair to you instead of appreciating the best innings played by a individual during the boring world cup you are finding ways to take out the glory from it. I am a Pakistani and from day one I told my friends that no body can beat the Aussies in their current form. Well done Gilchrist and keep on keeping the squash ball and trash bowlers all over the world

Answer 6

what are you on about it isn't unfair if everyone can do it is it. ?

think about that for a second and secondly it would not make a huge effect on the way he played plus all these years he has batted so great he never used the squash ball up until now.

so think about what you say before u say it. every player at the cup had the same chance to do what gilly did it was just smart thinking by him and his coach.

Plus Fernando dropped gilly when he was on 31 runs and could have one the match for Sri Lanka.

Answer 7

What made Fernando to lose grip on the catch?when Gilchrist was on 31.
That was the turning point.Gilchrist who was a bit cautious till then,broke loose and there they lost it.
A a la Gibbs in 1999.

Answer 8

WHATS UN -FAIR he had the ok from the icc thats all that matters,plus have you ever put one in a glove and tried it,bloody un comfortable i don't know how he kept it in there,lastly catches win matches and fernando dropped the biggest catch of his life and probably dropped the world cup.

Answer 9

I see nothing unfair that Adam kept a squash ball in his glove in the finals. They had requested the permission and it was granted.

Answer 10

If he has used some innovative idea which helped him bat better and as no one has raised any objection for the same, how can one term it as unfair practice. Any practice followed as long as it is not against the laws and rules cannot be termed as unfair.