Illegal or Legal?

Question

Adam Gilchrist worn a special glove to grip the cric bat.
He made 149 cheating points & rest of the aussies including capt Ricky ticky pointing did not score high against the Lakan bowlers,why is that?
&

Isn't this unfair for the other batting team bc, I'm sure if Sanath Jayasuriya & Kumar Sangakkara worn that special cheating glove, the lions would easily chase 280 with no light, rain, & steroid usage from Adam Gilchrist.

"In Lion We Trust."

"We'll never give up this fight
Until we reach our destiny
We will never give up our goal to win
And show Australian racist what lions can be."

Is the glove of Adam Gilchrist legal or illegal?
He had a special glove that no other batsman had from Sri lanka?
Adam's glove is not news yet?

Answer 1

What's the problem in wearing a special glove and taking a squash ball in the left hand?
The batsman bat the same way as they bat whether they wear a special glove or not.
And it is not unfair for the other batting team because if Sanath Jayasuriya & Kumar Sangakkara wanted they can also use the glove. No one told them not to use it.

Answer 2

I think it should be illegal, no other players used it. Why was Adam Gilchrist allowed to use it, thats not fair, in my opinion Sanath Jayasuriya can be much more dangerous than Adam Gilchrist, but the thing with him is, he never used anything other then what was expected. Did Gilchrist think they would only win with that squash ball? If he didn't then why would he even bother to use it, if he did think that, it's true, they only won because of that and bad weather. So i agree with you 100%, i would call it a cheating glove as well.
Oh and by the way.... AUSSIES SUK A**....
LANKA ALL THE WAYYYYYYYYYYY=D
*rain rain why didn't you go away, how could the lions catch their prey that day*


the balagraj guy makes no sense what so ever

Answer 3

Guess you can't go against the fact that he wore a squash ball beneath his gloves, coz as far as i know there is nothing in the rules which says you can't do it. But as a staunch supporter of the lions its pretty sad to know that gilchrist did get it going at the finals.
More that the squash ball beneath gilchrists glove it was the weather that supported the aussies from the start, or else we would have thrashed those kangaroo butts back to there hell hole.

Answer 4

by cricket law- prohibit any othetr
sporting equipment to be used

dont worry oneday oz gonna doomed
the truth gonna win oneday
like ros Emerson
& daryl hair, they gonna perish
yes we always see that icc support these european & pale skinned countries.

yes first you cheat
then you gonna beat

the way to be beaters
take the path of cheaters



Gilchrist played that way cuz they had known only by cheating
they could win
if they had played it sunday ...50 overs & gilchrist played
with out Squash ball...fair umpires ruled..
i am day dreamin here eh...
this ICC and Speed all are under obligation to Big Australia Continent.that is the truth
they do whatever to beat srilanka cuz
if they played fair & squre Oztralia would be doomed
so Silly-Gilly took the wrong way
its a crime
so he is a sorta criminal...for honest Fans

The World Cup final was between Sri Lanka and Gilchrist (not Australia). All other in-form Australian batsmen were struggling to score except the out-of-form Gilchrist who had this squash ball to enhance his grip

if it is not illegal
what is illegal in cricket

Answer 5

The fact that neither the Sri Lankan Team and the Sri Lanka Cricket and no other cricket authorities have never raised any complaint is ample evidence that nothing illegal in Adam Gilchrist using the squash ball.

Answer 6

I am not sure what you are talking about. Sorry, it is my ignorance. Please take up the matter seriously with proper authorities if your claim has any merit.

However, please do not use these 'adjectives' in your official complaints to ICC, as you have done here (lol).

Btw, I thought that Cricket is gentlemen's game and people would take defeat graciously, even if the Umpire had wrong decisions. What happened to this noble game? People are talking too much in these days about cheating things in cricket which were seldom heard when there were no third Umpire (Match Referee) or the slow-motion replays etc.

Answer 7

CRICKET fans on the sub-continent have questioned Adam Gilchrist's match-winning innings in the World Cup final because he had a squash ball inside his batting glove.


Gilchrist belted 149 off just 103 balls to rip the rain-shortened final away from Sri Lanka but cricket bloggers in Sri Lanka, Pakistan and India have now asked whether the Australian wicketkeeper's innings was "legal".

After the match, Gilchrist said he had "something" in his left glove during his innings and when he reached his century he repeatedly pointed to his left batting glove with his right hand.

"I had a little message, to wave to someone at home in Australia about something in my glove," Gilchrist told the post-match media conference.

He then confirmed the message was for his batting coach and former West Australia player Bob Meuleman who, Gilchrist said, had advised him to carry a squash ball in his left, bottom hand to help him with his grip.

"His (Meuleman's) last words to me before I left the indoor training centre where I train with him in Perth were, 'If you are going to use it (squash ball), make sure when you score a hundred in the final you show me and prove to me you got it in there'. I had stayed true to that."

Some cricket fans are now asking whether, if Dennis Lilee's aluminium bat, Ricky Ponting's graphite-coated bat and Hanie Cronje's earpiece were declared illegal, Gilchrist's squash ball should be deemed an illegal artificial aid to batting.

To read what the bloggers have to say go to: http://wordpress.com/tag/cricket-etcetera/

"Two questions arise," wrote one blogger. "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?"

Another blogger said Gilchrist had indicated the squash ball in his left glove helped him with his grip during his "stupendous knock".

"But that's also where questions over the legality of Gilchrists innings, or the seeming lack of it, come in," he wrote.

"Can a batsman carry an object, in this case, a squash ballnot connected with cricket to help him on the field? Did he secure the prior permission of the umpires? Was the fielding side captain aware of the use of the squash ball? Did (Sri Lankan captain) Mahela Jayawardene approve its use?

"And, above all, and in a manner of speaking, did Gilchrists hidden ball give him an unfair advantage in knocking the daylights out of the Lankan bowlers?"

He lists the law of cricket No.3 as saying:

"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-keepers gloves comply with the requirements of Law 40.2 (gloves)."

Jerome Gasperson joined the blog from Australia: "You have very valid points and there are a few more unanswered questions that are worth pursuing further:

1) Gilchrist never used the squash ball in the past and also in any of the other 10 games prior to the finals. Did the squash ball help?

2) Gilchrist was out of form and didn't score many runs in the whole World Cup tour apart from the finals. Did the squash ball provide Gilchrist the required assistance to bring him back to form?

3) The World Cup final was between Sri Lanka and Gilchrist (not Australia). All other in-form Australian batsmen were struggling to score except the out-of-form Gilchrist who had this squash ball to enhance his grip or did it?

4) Most of his shots, mainly his eight sixes, were massive and cleared the grounds. Did the squash ball help?

5) The number of sixes hit by Gilchrist amounts to eight in the finals, compared to two in the previous 10 games. Is it because of the squash ball?

6) Gilchrist's average without the last innings would have been a mere 30.40 compared to the 45.30 after the finals. Did the squash ball help to boost his average?

7) Gilchrist's strikerate without the last innings would have been 91.57 compared to the 103.89 after the finals. Again, did the squash ball provide that extra power?

"I am not taking anything away from Adam Gilchrist's excellent innings," Gasperson wrote.

"That was an amazing innings which will be remembered by many for years to come. However, the question still remains: is it legal to use such equipment and will it provide assistance?"

Answer 8

What a moron. Cricket ke baare mein ko maloom nahin, aise hi kutte ki tara bhonkne lag gaya.

Don't call the Aussies cheats just cuz your team can't play cricket.

Sangakarra wouldn't be able to smash like Gilly if he stuffed a football in his glove.

By the way, where in the laws does it saw that what Gilly did was illeagal? Ha! Chootiya...

Answer 9

Yet he gave a catch and you dropped it like Gibbs.
I don't think Gilchrist would have revealed it if it was illegal.

Answer 10

If the match day officials and WC commitee approved it then it's legal. Stop crying.