EXPLAINED: Jonny Bairstow's stumped controversy - What do the rules say? | Sports Today

We talk sport 24x7, 365 days a year. Come join us for the latest analysis, exclusive interviews, news, and updates. Part of the AajTak and India Today Group.
For more content follow us on -
Instagram - / sportstodayofficial
Facebook - / sportstodayofficial
Twitter - / sportstodayofc
#jonnybairstow #ashes #cricket

[@BatMan-oe2gh]

From the moment the ball hits Carey's glove till he releases it is 0.87 seconds, no time to "settle". What makes me laugh is that McCullum has done in it in an ODI against Eng. As keeper, he threw down the stumps (the same way as Carey has done) and got Collingwood. Just excellent work by Carey and it is obvious he is the better keeper of the two teams.

[@yc8426]

Because it’s a convenient distraction from the team’s shortcomings (stoke’s greatness aside).

[@brotherben4357]

*0.87 seconds

[@BatMan-oe2gh]

@@brotherben4357 👍fixed

[@brotherben4357]

@@BatMan-oe2gh ❤️

[@kuhoyeptho]

Couldn't agree more

[@louquay]

Nice to see Indians and Australians agreeing on something cricket related for once 🤣

[@trevorpom]

20 minutes later...

[@jamesvozar1]

very true

[@invisiblecollege893]

This makes no sense whatsoever. We get along well

[@RD-ij2sz]

This video is not about agreement but about the cricket rule . Australia behaviour was non sporting .

[@trevorpom]

@@RD-ij2sz Cricket rule? It was given out. Therefore the rules were followed. Just like when England attempted the exact same thing, but failed. Respect is central to the Spirit of Cricket. Respect your captain, team-mates, opponents and the authority of the umpires. Play hard and play fair. Accept the umpire’s decision. Create a positive atmosphere by your own conduct, and encourage others to do likewise. Show self-discipline, even when things go against you. Congratulate the opposition on their successes, and enjoy those of your own team. Thank the officials and your opposition at the end of the match, whatever the result. Unfortunately, you and yours aren't following the spirit of cricket at all...while complaining that those who are, aren't. That's unsportsmanlike.

[@mariusbothma3277]

In 2022 against New Zealand, Bairstow did the same thing against Colin de Grandhomme during an LBW appeal. He paused outside his crease to look at umpire and Bairstow (slip at the time) [edit - NOT Bairstow but Ollie Pope] hit the stumps. The bowler was a certain S Broad (who was seen being very angry at the Australians). They were given the option of withdrawing the appeal but decided not to do it. All the English celebrated it as the brilliant play of Bairstow and the 'dozy' play of De Grandhomme. England can't claim the moral high ground here - they have done it before. The SAME players! As you showed they attempted it on Day 3 too. (slip at the time)

[@rennereich]

Small correction, it was Ollie Pope who threw the stumps down on CDG during the appeal, but you're absolutely not wrong with the rest of it. Especially Jonny Bairstow having done it before and trying to do it in this very test. If he'd managed to hit the stumps and Labuschagne (or Warner who he also tried it on in the first innings) got out, there's literally no way Ben Stokes would have withdrawn the appeal, he's just saying that because it's expected of him, and he can't agree with it AND have the "Aussies are cheaters" storyline he wants to have for this series.

[@mariusbothma3277]

@@rennereich Thank you, I thought it was Bairstow. I stand corrected. By the way, did you see the way Cummins handled that hostile jounalist in the press conference? Will we see mankadding or underarm bowling next? Well - depends how flat the picth is.... Absolutely well handled, turning a hostile question back at the person.

[@palaneproductions7357]

Shows em up as HIPOTOMUS critters EH!

[@thomridgeway1438]

You show yourself to be deeply misinformed and ignorant and just trying to deflect what is an embarrassing piece of bad sportmanship. The De Grandhomme was entirely different. Yesterday at Lords, it was the end of an over. Bairstow was not trying to seek an advantage, the umpires were already changing. In the De Grandhomme situ there was a chance of a run. Due to the notorious history of Vishoo Mankad, it is seen proper to warn a batter who strays from his crease. That didn't happen. It was a classless, low skilled act by Carey and Cummins and both will pay the price for it one day.

[@jjvanzyl3075]

Thanks for pointing this out. I commented on the bad sportsmanship of Australia but was mot aware of this incident. In that case what’s good for the goose is for the gander. I would rather loose than win this way. I think I am still caught in the sentiment of cricket being the one true gentleman’s game. That ship has sailed a long time ago

[@honeymcdonald9120]

The only "breaking the spirit of cricket" here - is bad losers, booing crowds and classless members. Cricket is about accepting an umpires decision, applauding the other teams success (everyone applauded Stokes' magnificent innings) and being a humble winner. These are what used to define cricket over every other sport. Bad sportsmanship on display by England. (I'm English and disgusted)

[@thomridgeway1438]

You are not English! Don't even claim you are!

[@onebigadvocado6376]

Well said 👏🏻👏🏻

[@richardwadd9769]

Not to mention Australia is 2 matches up in England. You’d better have a few beers, mate, it might get worse for you from here on in.

[@keithhennessey8159]

Totally agree with your comment

[@pwrrpw319]

Well said ! , I'm Australian & I'm disgusted ! , the catch that was denied to Starc when he steadied himself with the ball after ( and this is a key point!!1! ) after he easily took full control of the ball!, is in some ways much the same ! , is it in the spirit of the game to deny him that catch when he clearly had full control of it ?, funny how that wasn't an issue for the Poms when that was denied !!! , so what's the difference ! , Bairstow was caught napping ! & having a first class brain fade !!!! , anyone who knows anything about cricket, and or has played the game as I have, knows to watch the wicket keeper like a hawk !!!! why !!! cause he will be watching you and looking for an opportunity to stump you !, For frig sake it's cricket 101 !!!!!!! seriously Poms !, you are 100% wrong!!! get over it & move on !

[@daveoz2]

Spirit of the Game exhibit A: Bairstow attempted the exact same thing by trying to catch Marnus Labuschagne stepping out of his crease two days ago. Spirit of the Game exhibit B: England coach Brendon McCullum has three instances of identical dismissals. (Mpofu 2005, Muralitharan 2006, Collingwood 2009) Spirit of the Game exhibit C: Broad edging a ball to slip but refusing to walk, an edge the English quick has since admitted to. Spirit of the Game exhibit D: England keeper Ben Foakes stumping Irishman Andy Balbirnie after holding onto the ball for a far greater amount of time than what Carey did. Spirit of the Game exhibit E: The MCC long room behaved disgracefully. Not surprisingly three MCC members are now suspended. Spirit of the Game exhibit F: The crowd chanting that Australians are cheaters. Actually the only person convicted of cheating in this series is England's Moeen Ali. Spirit of the Game exhibit G: England bowling 'Bodyline' on day 4, for a record 98% short balls. Also extremely boring to watch - so much for "entertaining bazball". Spirit of the Game exhibit H: England/fans not respecting umpires decision. This was not a bad LBW call, a missed no ball (etc)... this was within the laws. Spirit of the Game exhibit I: Ollie Robinson telling Usman Khawaja to "F*** off" after dismissing him on 141. I won't add Duckett not walking re Starc's catch, because we respect that rules are rules. I also won't add England's controversial win over New Zealand in the World Cup final involving Stokes himself as there's been no shortage of comments about that.

[@ross4970]

And I call out the pommy immigration department for fast tracking Jofra Archer's permit to play for the poms just before ashes2019. Pommys use rules to suit themselves.

[@Wisey_83]

The Pom's, i notice, will look for any and all other reasons for a defeat, rather than ever look to themselves for scoring less run than thier opposition. And not taking advantage of the Aussies best bowler NOT BEING ON THE FIELD. Try harder you pommy bastards. Or dont, instead accept responsibilty, and congratulate your opposition.

[@haydenwalton2766]

damn fuckin right Dave !

[@palaneproductions7357]

Thanks for all that detail, those Poms are sore losers

[@dophilduplessis]

So Steve Smith and Warner never cheated against South Africa? Give me a break and get off your high horse. Reality is that Bairstow was out. Super questionable sportsmanship that we are used to of the Aussies, but he was out without a doubt and within the rules of the game. From a South African rooting for the Aussies, they sucked

[@samrad1745]

That was poetic justice,,, A keeper stumping a Keeper.. Love it.. The only thing England are griping about in this match , is that they didn't do it first. By the way,, Johnny and Duckett had More lives that a cat in the tests so for.

[@carl8290]

Barstow is not a keeper.

[@raymondbabb1970]

What a very well explained breakdown of the dismissal.

[@petergrundy8081]

I agree on a tough decision given the timing of the game but completely within the rules Bairstow created the opportunity and yes it is not cheating.

[@jayantamondal5492]

Absolutely sir, I'm agreed Australians are well aware of all the formats of cricket and even rules

[@fletap7782]

Thank you for that clear explanation. In Australia we call them "whinging poms" - now the world can see why.

[@knight2425]

You can add sore losers and hypocrites to that now

[@tonywise198]

Aussies are the POMS (Prisoners Of His Majesty)

[@philippkirsch2716]

Brilliant analysis. Fair. Balanced. To the point. Thank you.

[@jeremyreid9582]

I would support the english teams’ disappointment with this event … but I recognise how English team’s past own selfish unsporting behaviour has come back to knee them in a very sensitive area… I thank Lady Karma for her immaculate timing. ❤️

[@thedronedownunder3919]

I'm an Australian. Mate, thank you for taking the time to spell this out so clearly. I'd also like to ad that Ben Stokes knock was one of the best I've seen in years. We know he's an amazing cricketer. Just a shame he doesn't play for his country of origin 🤣

[@markstrevett1284]

Is he a Māori then?

[@rorykeegan1895]

Bit like your Pacific Islander Rugby players?

[@davidprosser457]

Like labuschagne you mean?

[@alexlanning712]

@@davidprosser457 Like erzatz Poms Tony Greig and Kevin Pietersen--the only "Poms" with any backbone

[@MichaelJones-zl9ok]

Bit like Quade Cooper in rugby union

[@cynderfan2233]

There is no controversy. Bairstow stepped off his crease before the ball was called dead. He's out. Its RULE 1 of batting. DON'T LEAVE THE CREASE UNLESS TRYING TO SCORE OR THE BALL IS DEAD.

[@nerdyali4154]

Nobody "calls" the ball dead. Bairstow was perfectly entitled to think the play was over because he hadn't left his crease in the act of playing the ball and Carey had fielded it. 99.9999% of the time everybody would just accept that the play was over but Carey suddenly decided he was going to get sneaky.

[@mytwosense9135]

​@@nerdyali4154So when Foakes sneakily did it in a 'genius stumping' he was applauded by the English media but now playing like that is 'sneaky'!? Give us a spell

[@956675]

There is controversy around this in my opinion. But it has nothing to do with the stumping. It has everything to do with the way the English reacted to the situation. They dot have to like it. I wouldn't like it either. But you need to put the blame where it belongs. Barstow was being lazy and lacking awareness. Stupid way to lose your wicket.

[@garyrowe58]

The point is, the ball was thrown when the batsman was in his crease. It was thrown in anticipation that the batsman would mistakenly think the over was over, and walk towards the other batsman to converse. It was NOT the usual stumping!

[@wowwipeout71]

Well done mate, great explanation and hopefully educates those who casually follow cricket.

[@alientracker140]

If there was ever a mystery why the term "Pommie Whinger" came about, look no further than the Lords ashes test match !

[@rectum5754]

😂Spot on

[@stilllearning1160]

Yes. I'm an Aussie. I love the Brits but they really do let themselves down with this character flaw. Come to think of it, isn't this why we have an 'Ashes' anyway? Some wife of some nineteenth century English Lord so upset that us convicts beat them that she had to make a song and dance about it and burn the stumps and put the ashes in an urn. Good thing that she did though.

[@nerdyali4154]

You should try criticising Aussieland. The "we can laugh at ourselves" attitude disappears in a cloud of self-righteous b*tching.

[@glenhoddle9]

@@stilllearning1160 I´m a Brit, but I agree about whinging Poms - we´d be frigging Olympic champs at it the way some f*ckers go on!! Many would manage to find the bad in ANY good situation or would find relief in the comfort of things returning to normal and going t*ts-up once more e.g. especially in team sports! It might have something to do with the terrible climate, although others get some rubbish weather too, but at least we´ve managed to develop a sophisticated sense of humour and other things to try and off-set this terrible habit.

[@matt-8812]

Great video and explanation, every aussie who has played cricket as a kid has had an experience with a keeper throwing down there stumps to keep them honnest in the crease

[@collectivesartori]

Generally only need to experience it once or twice to learn to get your bat back! Say around 8 years old 😆

[@thatsbollox]

It was always just a simple but well executed stumping. Emotions were running high for England fans and players though. Those emotions got the better of them. These dismissals have always been a part of the game. You can stump someone from a spinner or a seamer as long as you dont allow the ball to become dead...and of course before the umpire calls end of the over. He is a very smart and very good w/keeper. It should have never been controversial in any way....just great play.

[@nerdyali4154]

That's not an accurate summing up. Carey threw the ball at the stumps because he knew Bairstow regarded the ball as dead. That is far from an ordinary stumping. In fact I'm not sure Bairstow was out of his crease when Carey released the ball.

[@thatsbollox]

@@nerdyali4154 Dont make shit up...Carey didnt have time to think of anything other than immediately aiming for the stumps. Doyou realise that what youare saying is that no wicket keeper can ever again try to stump a guy off a seam bowler ? You are correct in saying that Bairstow had not even left the crease when he threw it. Thats how quick it was. I was perfect in fact. No delay so ball is completely in play and alive. What about when Carey is up to the stumps to a spinner and Bairstow lifts his foot ?...if Carey had whipped off the bails and got lucky should he now be given not out ?...coz you know...he probably forgot he could be stumped for his foot not being grounded.. Also, did you notice Ben Stokes with his bat grounded in the crease at the bowlers end ? Why would he do that ? This issue has gone beyond stupid for such an obvious dismissal. It is like a full meltdown of silliness and preciousness

[@mytwosense9135]

​@@nerdyali4154😂😂😂😂😂😂 Cope harder mate

[@trevorpom]

@@nerdyali4154 Yes it was and... Yes, he was, that's how stumping works. Cry elsewhere please.

[@BG-id2cv]

@@nerdyali4154 BS! And the BS in this instance doesn't stand for Ben Stokes.

[@bhaumikpatel2968]

England is biggest crybaby when things don’t go their way

[@guhan755]

You didn't mention "the" Article in front of biggest which is the superlative degree you used here. For this silly grammar mistake England will cry like jonny jonny yes papa.

[@tom4115]

Correct. And they always have been.

[@devin-1]

​@@guhan755You will be trolled for spelling his name as "Jonny".😅

[@mytwosense9135]

Well, it's exactly why The Ashes exist in the first place! Whinging poms!

[@nevvanclarke9225]

I'm just going to say what I need to say it was one of the most brilliant thinking bits of cricket by any cricketer that ever played the game been watching Bairstow for a couple of overs doing it he just waited for the right moment. And it's not up to the wicketkeeper to tell the batsman to stay in his ground full stop the ball was life and no rule has been broken full stop if you're going to start raising the issue of Spirit of cricket then people need to start walking when they Nick the ball and we ain't gonna see that again. No one walks anymore and fair enough that's just the way the game is played now you can't then Resort to this in the spirit of the game rubbish What's laughable is Jonny Bairstow and English coach Brendon McCullum have both been guilty of doing this very same thing to other players then you can't turn around and say but this is cheating this isn't in the spirit of the game when they have been guilty of doing exactly the same thing stop I just want to applaud scary for his thinking and also let's not forget the ability to actually hit the stumps - standing a fair way back

[@sejklr]

Brilliant video, explains what happened really well, thanks.

[@teddythewonderlizard1448]

Excellent analysis and explanation. Well done!

[@marksmoore]

Very well explained.

[@cornishpasty6926]

The basic rule is don't leave the crease while the ball is live.

[@kerrymattrobertsharris6707]

All club cricketers know to protect themselves from potential stumpings & run outs after they have faced a delivery. It's one of the basics you learn from junior cricket. Jonny was asleep at the wheel & paid the price. Very good analysis, the rules explained perfectly. Bring on the third test.

[@mithrasrevisited4873]

Strange, when Stark caught the ball and was ruled a non catch by a technicality, where was the England batsman walking to preserve the "spirit of the game"? Bairstow had tried the same stumping and the English coach had done the same thing in other matches. It seems the English want to make up the rules and do not like anybody else using their tactics.

[@mathewaitken938]

It was one of the first rules I ever learned about the game when I was a little kid. Behind your crease and you’re safe, in front and you’re not. Simple. Australia won because they were the better team.

[@palaneproductions7357]

And played knowing the rules!

[@collectivesartori]

And play more backyard/ street cricket as kids 😆

[@adesalter3854]

Insightful and accurate analysis and professionally presented.

[@soniaaaaable]

U can see Bairstow walking 2-3 times in the same way prior in the over also... but he was spared... it is not a garden to stroll everytime... u have to be conscious when ur batting...

[@irfanbardgujar8612]

Usko laga over khatam ho gaya isme konsi galat baat hai

[@soniaaaaable]

@@irfanbardgujar8612 pehley 1st nd 2nd ball kyu bahar aye... jaakey unkey follow thru dheklo... uske aadat he... crease chodke Bahar aana

[@thomridgeway1438]

So how many times have Australian batsman done that in the past, because there are some shitty, classless things that we don't do.

[@soniaaaaable]

@@thomridgeway1438 when it is within the rule there is nothing wrong... in this match only u can see Bairstow tried to do the same to labushagne but he dint hit the stumps...so it happens... u ppl don't try to b gud boys nw...

[@onebigadvocado6376]

​@@thomridgeway1438did you miss the evidence of Bairstow doing the exact same thing in the same match?

[@aussienscale]

And to be fair, Bairstow also did the same thing in this same match !!

[@knight2425]

Also did it in first test against Head

[@cabaretampere]

Not the same, Labaushagne didn't think the ball was dead. Bairstow was out and Carey and Cummins are fine to do what they did, but don't play stupid and pretend it's just a normal stumping.

[@knight2425]

@@cabaretampere it was very much a normal stumping, Marnus and Head as are most of the Aussies know that Bairstow likes to try and get batsmen out like this so always are aware of him but Bairstow was just plain dumb to not think about it.

[@cabaretampere]

@@knight2425 Bairstow likes to get batsmen out for gardening? Was Labaushagne gardening when he was calling wait for the run? Why have international captains reversed appeals for batsmen stumped like this? Look at Dhoni withdrawing the appeal against Bell or Vettori for Murali. Yes Eng are over-reacting, but so are you by acting as though it's just a regular stumping when it clearly isn't.

[@knight2425]

@cabaretampere I'm not over reacting, I just can't believe all the rubbish English supporters are talking especially about it being unsportsmanlike and not in the spirit. It's in the rules and so there isn't anything wrong but too many have their butt hurt. Funny thing is knicking a ball and standing your ground is more unsportsmanlike than this but there isn't any problem with doing that apparently 🤣🤣🤣

[@AlexSmith-gr4hp]

The fact that England tried for the same type of dismissal in the same match, and it’s a regular thing in cricket by all teams, then it’s clearly within the spirit of cricket.

[@johnnykaplan3837]

Not the same. The Aussie batter was batting out of its crease so he was exploiting an early advantage by doing so. With Jonny there was no advantage involved.

[@thedalailemur]

@@johnnykaplan3837Advantage only counts in a run out mate. In stumpings no advantage is involved-if a batsman’s back foot drags out of the crease, it isn’t to gain advantage, but he is potentially punished for not staying behind the crease while the ball is live.

[@nerdyali4154]

@@thedalailemur Wrong. If a batsman drags his foot out of the crease it is because he went forward in the act of trying to play a shot and was beaten by the bowler. In the Bairstow case the action was essentially over with Bairstow in his crease and the ball taken by the keeper. It's like the batsman picking up the ball to give it to the keeper. He could technically be given out for that in some circumstances but there is trust between the players that nobody is going to get silly. In this situation Carey essentially broke a similar code of trust. In the normal course of events the keeper would accept that the play is over but Carey took advantage of that convention.

[@letstalk3265]

I remember this being ingrained in all cricketers from the youngest ages, stumping/run out options for all players to recognise and understand. This is one of them for sure. You never forget getting stumped/run out that way.

[@mytwosense9135]

​@@nerdyali4154Stop it 😂😂😂😂

[@Bruce15485]

Bairstow was doing the same thing to Manus Labuschagne the day before, and he was not even out of his crease !!!.

[@bambolenathcricketpredicti3221]

Smart work done by carrey really good presence of mind

[@gazsomeone7300]

One aspect that is not mentioned, or seems not to be with teh two examples from the 2nd test is the reaction differenced between Bairstow and labuschagne. Labuschage turns and watches the ball into the keeper's gloves, sees bairstow throw it and retreats to his crease. Bairstow on the other hand did not look behine at the keeper but just planted his foot then started to walk out. Had he been watching, had he have looked behind he woudl not have been stumped as he would have seen what was occurring.

[@rectum5754]

Exactly

[@nerdyali4154]

Nope. Labuschagne left his crease in the act of playing the ball and any batsman knows he can be stumped like that. Bairstow was in his crease and in control of his feet when the ball was taken. He had every reason to believe the play was over.

[@mytwosense9135]

​@@nerdyali4154But it wasn't because it wasn't. Pudding guts needs to learn the rules, much like the whinging poms.

[@gazsomeone7300]

@@nerdyali4154 Except, he did not know that the ball had been taken as he never looks back - as Mmarnus does and as the vast majority of batters do. All batsman should watch teh ball into the keeper's gloves but Bairstow does not and what occured was not new to him, it is habit. His not knowing where the ball was as he did not look is a serious lack of awareness on his behalf - as example, what if the ball was dropped and byes were available? Situational awareness was lacking and he paid fairly

[@BG-id2cv]

@@nerdyali4154 Bairstow also ducked the bouncer. So if Carey hadn't taken the ball cleanly Bairstow may have been able to take byes, but unlike most batsmen who look where the ball traveled after it has been delivered, Bairstow didn't look to what happened to the ball. If he had looked (like Marnus) he may have got back in his crease and not been stumped. Rule 1: never take your eye off the ball. Rule 2: never leave your crease when the ball is still in play...which in this case it very much was. OUT STUMPED! As Nasser Hussain stated in regard to the Carey stumping of Bairstow "Ruthless, smart, switched on". I rest my case.

[@andrewhazlewood4569]

Excellent, thorough, methodical, unbiased and clearly, logically correct. In my opinion the stumping was unusual but the controversy was the behaviour of the English fans and players. But my opion is not unbiased.

[@craftsmanwoodturner]

I'm an England fan, but I agree totally with this. Bairstow was a numpty for wandering off far too soon. All he had to do was wait for the umpire to call "over". You'd expect top flight cricketers to know this, but apparently not.

[@Soubhik12345.]

Only Sid in the Sports Today team talks some sense. Others are pretty average and obnoxious at times 😢

[@jaikumarjadhav6575]

England should ask themselves one question: Wouldn't they take a run immediately if Carey fumbled, or if he missed the stumping or hit the wickets and went away.

[@53glowe]

Very good point 👍

[@hellagood67]

My argument too.

[@sreejithvarma8677]

Never really understood why Bairstow was is such a hurry ! He didn’t even check if the keeper had collected the ball! Had Carrey failed to collect it and the ball went past him, would he not have run when Stokes calls him for single?

[@windyhillbomber]

Excellent, independent and impartial analysis

[@groov9804]

he is a wicket keeper he should know the rules

[@yakidin63]

A wicket keeper that regularly does what Carey did. Hypocrite for sure

[@iankearns774]

@@NOOB-lk9on I reckon thats why Carey did it. The Aussies would have known about Bairstow for years and not tried it, him trying it on Marnus opened that can of whoop arse on himself.

[@user-le8sn3xn2i]

In the spirit of the game they say. I think the only spirit here was that consumed by MCC Members ?

[@mikesuahtla9826]

Well researched and presented. Agree 100 percent with your assessment

[@mathewsherwell1486]

Absolutely a great analysis. Well done to you and your analysis of the situation. Kudos

[@somashekharertyug9528]

Excellent use of Words and beautifully explained Native English speaker Would be proud 😊

[@woopimagpie]

The only thing that's not in the spirit of the game is the disgraceful reaction from the English team and public. Bairstow had a brain fade. The Australians did nothing wrong at all. Regarding the reaction, I get it, I felt the same after the much talked about game in 2019. Leach was clearly out but was not given, Australia had no reviews left so could not do anything about it. Australia were absolutely robbed in that game. What did I do? I accepted that the game was lost because of the mistakes Australia had made (using up the reviews out of desperation, the fumbled run out, the idiotic bowling to Stokes strength, and not having made enough runs in the first place). When faced with a failure you should always consider reviewing your own role in that failure first. You analyse it and learn from it. The England team and fans seem unable to do this currently, choosing instead to deflect the blame for their failure on to the victors. Inability to accept your own failings is a sure sign of emotional immaturity. Take note England. It's cricket. Sometimes stuff like this happens. Sometimes you're on the winning team, sometimes not. How you deal with perceived injustice is what separates adults from children. The behaviour of the crowd at Lords was pretty bad, but it's an Ashes series, emotions and stakes are high. I get it. Stuff like that happens at sporting events the world over. It's not great, but it surprises no one really. But what was REALLY uncalled for was the behaviour in the Long Room at the lunch break. THAT was an utter disgrace, there's no other word for it. Dare I use the accusation of "bringing the sport into disrepute"? (A truly heinous crime in context). Especially given that the Australians had done nothing wrong, and the bald faced hypocrisy of England would soon be on display for all to see. A blind man on a galloping horse could see that not only were the accusers actually perpetrators of the same act, but also that if given the same opportunity would have enacted exactly the same play. Stokes saying he wouldn't have done it is a load of .... well, I won't say horseshit because horseshit has a use as a fertiliser, what Stokes said might be the most empty-headed gutter-press pandering I've ever seen. THAT is what's not in the spirit of the game. England need to grow up, and fast. The third Test is in two days. If they go into it with this childish indignance they will surely be beaten again. 5-0 suddenly doesn't seem so ridiculous.

[@mikaham681]

Regardless of the Bairstow stumping, Bairstow has an average against Australia of only 29 runs. So even if he stayed in, its unlikely England would have got enough runs to win. England lost the game because the main English batters failed to score enough runs. Even Stokes only scored 17 in the first innings. England have changed their game style for the better, but they have not lost their tendency to whinge about losing.

[@collectivesartori]

Lovely work, thank you. Every kid in oz who plays cricket learns to respect his wicket by obeying the rule of the crease at about 7 years old. Apparently Bairstow missed that class in backyard cricket 😂

[@bomurra8688]

He Has a typical "Born to Rule" mentality

[@collectivesartori]

@@bomurra8688 if so that would be very unfortunate (for him) 😀

[@JPASSY]

Ex-cricketer Aakash Chopra also echoed similar views and wrote: "Let's say this again- Whatever is within the ‘Laws of the Game' can't possibly be ‘Against The Spirit Of the Game'."

[@nerdyali4154]

Well he is wrong. Laws like this are a practical matter of codifying when the play is over for the purposes of stringency in the case of dispute. The players know when the play is over as a practical matter without strict adherence to the law. Bairstow had not left his crease in the act of playing the ball and the keeper had taken it. End of play by normal convention. Carey was essentially being sneaky.

[@mytwosense9135]

​@@nerdyali4154😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂

[@JPASSY]

@@nerdyali4154 LOL 🙄Carey wasn’t sneaky he was on the ball and smart, Bairstowon the other hand was dozy and too arrogant to even look to Carey to see if the ball was not still in play a basic rule that a school boy is taught. Why does he think that he is above the law? I bet though that Bairstow won’t be doing that any more 😉😂

[@neilhayes288]

I wonder what you think of Bairstow on day 1 to Warner and day 3 to Marnus attempting the same stumping / run out as Carey, but with infinitely less coordination or success. Or is it that the English believe it is not possible to be run out or stumped off the last ball of the over? Was Bairstow playing outside the spirit of the game, or is that honour exclusive to the Australians? As far as the long room debacle is concerned, I suppose that's what you get when you lower your membership standards to include soccer hooligans and the Barmy Army!

[@LuvHrtZ]

The Poms have always felt that they are born to rule. It must chafe their collective buns that a bunch of convicts could clean their chronometers.

[@markstrevett1284]

We know the Aussies are good at sports. It's down to the good weather, juicy steaks, healthy outdoor lifestyle and the lack of any distracting intellectual activities.

[@peterwhitehead4924]

100% correct and explained. England are unhappy but this is basic lack of awareness by Bairstowe when batting.

[@Krzyszczynski]

This sort of thing goes all the way back to the celebrated 1882 test at the Oval (from which "The Ashes" originated). Australian batsman Sammy Jones finished his run and grounded his bat, but neglected to call "in" to show he wasn't going to run any more. He then wandered out of his ground to do some "gardening", and the "great" W G Grace promptly whipped off the bails and appealed for a run-out. The umpire was allegedly very reluctant to allow it, but the laws (and Grace standing firm ) left him no option.

[@brasso4597]

Really good analysis. Thanks mate.

[@christrimmer3947]

Well done, excellent summary of the situation.

[@tinkertailor7385]

Bairstow was guilty of a schoolboy mistake. Nobody likes being out in such an embarrassing manner, but it happens. I remember Shane Warne being given out for absently wandering outside his crease in an IPL match back in the late 2000's, perhaps 2011 or so. Warnie ended up bowling out the other team that Andrew Symonds was captaining(?) in a last over cliff hanger, Deccan Chargers I think it was.... Great game.

[@konradyearwood5845]

I remember when Faoud Bacchus used to field at silly point for the West Indies. His reflexes were so sharp that batsmen were regularly jumping back into their crease to avoid being run out as he would quickly release the ball with a flick of the wrist. Batsmen would also have to pause for a second to ensure the ball had gone past him before setting off for a quick single and that added to pressure on the running and increased the possibility of run outs. By fielding that close in with such reactions batsmen could not bat far out of the crease and it was like having the keeper standing up to Holding, Roberts etc.

[@111jacare]

Ricky Ponting run out Geriant Jones in either the Melbourne or Sydney test. Fielding at short mid off, an appeal was had for a LBW off Warne's bowling. Ball rolled to Ponting, who dived forward and his throw hit the stumps, finding Jones about 1 - 2 cm short of making his ground.

[@nerdyali4154]

Nothing to do with this circumstance.

[@111jacare]

@@nerdyali4154: The response was to @konradyearwood5845 post about Faoud Bacchus. It was noted that Ricky Ponting actually effected a run out from silly mid off against Geriant Jones. Yes, nothing to do with the Carey / Bairstow dismissal, but, in response to the OP.

[@johnkearney478]

Bairstow was walking out of the crease before the ball had hit Carey's hand. Bairstow was so out that he outed himself before his brain clicked back into gear to even realise he was out ... Gaaawn Git👆

[@zchettaz]

At the time Carey threw the ball, Bairstow was still in his crease. But the rest of your comment is accurate - if this was an LBW that hit his leg on the full, in-line with middle, no shot offered, he would still think he edged it first, cause his brain cant tell the difference between a cherry and a plum.

[@banksiasong]

Bazball - Fail Bodyball - Fail Brexitball - Fail. The MCC make the Rules, but their entitlement means that the English don't think THEY should abide by the Rules. Thank you for your video, you are an unbiased observer.

[@paulstevens9087]

It was NOT a match defining moment, but the assessment of the stumping is accurate, not a run out. It is simply out.

[@kelskye]

If Carey's throw has missed and it went to a vacant field position, the batsmen would have run overthrows. No doubts about it. I get why this would be seen as an unsporting act even if it's in the rules and even if England players have done similar things in the past. But it's being blown up mainly because England aren't performing well in this series so far. If England were winning and this happened, there would be far less noise. If England did this to Australia, the MCC faithful wouldn't be abusing the English players. But when they are behind and losing, it becomes a focus point for all the negative emotions losing brings up.

[@markstrevett1284]

England aren't performing well in this series? I can't recall two ashes tests that were so evenly matched and could have gone either way right up to the last few overs. Don't confuse losing with not performing well.

[@stilllearning1160]

Yeah, the Poms let themselves down.

[@edjacobs6897]

Look at CDG at Lord's , given out LBW , so the ball is dead , then run out by Pope, given out - error by umpire but crowd applause

[@akshatkhedekar8561]

No matter what benstokes says , in reality no team would change or overturn a decision which is in their favor unless it doesn't have any impact on the result

[@paulscottrobson]

Clearly not true.

[@comeatmebro3229]

@@paulscottrobson all the ex england captains in commentary said they wouldnt have called him back

[@rectum5754]

@@paulscottrobson Clearly true

[@stilllearning1160]

Especially if it is within the rules, which any self respecting professional cricketer should be familiar with. Heck, they get paid enough.

[@spiromlb]

Thanks for excellent interpretation of Bairstow's own goal ! Even kids cricket knows this rule. And where was his mate tell him : "Stay within your crease!" ? And you expect your competitor to warn you ?

[@eattheheat1919]

Great analysis mate! It is refreshing to hear someone tell it like it is.

[@keithmitchell3282]

if england had won the match they would not even mention this stupid blunder by bairdstow , the convicts again educating the pom's, in their own game and RULES , well done gentlemen

[@kinchegayowie6167]

we were never convicts, that is the bullshit we have been fed

[@annbusfield1205]

No apostrophe in poms . It is merely a plural of pop.

[@annbusfield1205]

Pom

[@PeterBrasso]

My ancestors weren’t convicts. They couldn’t wait to get out of England, and emigrated !

[@haydenwalton2766]

@@annbusfield1205 look out, it's the apostrophe police !

[@goodvibes0101]

Great breakdown of the play and always a laugh when the poms can't hold a stiff upper lip 😂

[@Johnno1979]

Good unbiased analysis of a polarizing incident. Thanks.

[@sureshkp87]

Clearly Carey just threw the ball and wasn't even expecting to be a runout, but Bairstow kept walking as usual and he was out and then they appealed and third umpire ruled him out as simple as that.

[@sharath_doc]

When leisure becomes lecture 😢

[@mis-tur-tay-bur]

Long-time cricket fan and writer/editor here. The "spirit of cricket" has always been a noble lie. Think about it: when did it actually enter the game? It wasn't there at its inception when Spofforth was punching Poms on the proboscis and Grace was steadfastly staying at the wicket even after being given out. In the 1930s this elusive "spirit" of unknown provenance was being invoked as Larwood tactically tore the Aussies apart at Jardine's request. For a while, bowling bumpers at tail-enders was frowned upon, but this supposed "unspoken law" was soon dispensed with if that tail-ender was presumptuous enough to flout the "spirit" of the game and score a run too many. Once, Lindwall knocked a man out with a bouncer because he insultingly stood outside of his crease. Trueman was hardly a paragon of puritanical rectitude and was proud of it. "Mad" Jack Flavell didn't protest his sobriquet. He wanted to destroy every man be bowled at. Let's test the spirit. What exactly has been the greatest threat to it - just so we know its location? What was the boundary situation? Was it Vinoo Mankad in 1947-48, who noticed non-striker Bill Brown backing up too far? Instead of releasing the ball, he stopped and broke the wicket. He’d sufficiently warned Bill, having already dismissed him likewise in a tour game, yet the huffing press almost labelled it impertinence, ensuring his name entered cricket’s lexicon as a byword for dishonesty. But do you know why Mankad was so "impertinent"? Because he was sick of his own countrymen deferring to the Aussies and the English. Those who dusted off the "spirit of cricket" back then actually had their pens at the ready to criticise any bowling from those funny little Subcontinental people that amounted to more than a mere tribute offering. Was India's decades-old doctoring of pitches a violation of this "spirit"? What about the West Indies' real and implied threats to batsmen all over the Commonwealth when they were at their zenith? Adam Gilchrist was actually criticised by many of these same upholders of cricket's "spirit" when he decided he WOULD walk, despite being the only man on the field to know he'd nicked it. One was actually somehow acting within the bounds of this amorphous thing called cricket's spirit when one never admitted he was out. It's rather indefinable really, isn't it, old chaps, this "spirit"? Honestly, Piers and Geoffrey and the Lord's members look and sound like dribbling, drivelling privileged Pommy prats when they long for a fantasy bygone era and talk about tarnishing a game that was never exempt from human nature, and ceased being some kind of pastoral idyll the moment men like Spofforth and Grace entered the scene, bringing spectators with them.

[@lennykusa9025]

Well done. Emotions are faster than words period! Can't wait for the next clash.

[@getupkid84]

"Australia have exposed England's hypocrisy in the Ashes"....spot on!

[@Ed_Downunder]

Interesting analysis. Booing and not accepting the umpire decision, is the offence that is not in the spirit of the game.

[@danzigvssartre]

If it's out in club cricket, why should people expect it doesn't apply to professional cricketers playing on the world stage?

[@jacobkuntflapp]

I cant get over how babylike this english team has reacted. You lost, grow up

[@zeropoint546]

Let alone the Lords members. How embarrassing.

[@davidparris7167]

@@zeropoint546 A bunch of chinless wonders and upper class twits.

[@panayotisdamianakis3658]

Rules are rules - all's fair in love and war. I was taught this very rule in primary school - on the pitch against other school teams, we were always mindful and protected our crease. The only thing this Bairstow wicket offered insight into was what a bunch of poor sportsman the English spectators are, in particular those in the members stand.

[@falseprofit4u]

Rules is Rules, Mitchell Stark's catch not out is ultimately the umpire's call as is Bairstowe's mistake not consulting the umpire.

[@downeyd88]

Good fair understanding, thankyou for shedding light on what we all know. It was within the rules

[@andysmudge4849]

It's not that he's trying to take an advantage. In case of mankading, yes that's completely fair. But here, It's just some ignorance and stupidity on Bairstow's part. This is where spirit of cricket comes in. You can run a player out who slips in while running. If you choose not to, that comes under spirit of cricket. If not, that's fine too. Just understand the difference, journos...

[@n_mckean]

So Bairstow fumbled the ball two days earlier that were aimed at Marnus's stumps?

[@chriswatson7965]

If he's not getting an advantage then why was he doing it? Of course he's getting an advantage he is 1) getting to mentally relax when he shouldn't be 2) dominating the umpires 3) disrespecting the wicketkeeper 4) attempting to cut short the amount of time of the ball is live and thus reducing the risk of getting out 5) attempting a style of play that suits his personality but one that is not within the laws of the game. What's worse he's showing a complete disrespect for the profession of wicket-keeping whose role is precisely that of stopping the batsman from going up the pitch whenever he wants, thus keeping the wicket. It is not up to the batsman to determine when the ball is dead. With many mankads the batsman is at least trying to stay within the laws of the game. Bairstow didn't bother and didn't care. Sloppy, dozy, unprofessional and disrespectful.

[@andysmudge4849]

@@n_mckean Marnus was batting a long way out from the crease and it's like taking an advantage. But Bairstow thought that the ball was dead and even umpires started moving away. I don't think both cases fit in the same picture.

[@n_mckean]

@@andysmudge4849 but that’s you choosing where to subjectively draw the line on what is and is not appropriate behaviour. I guess that’s why there’s a rule book.

[@andysmudge4849]

@@chriswatson7965 That's stupid on Bairstow's part. There might come a scenario where you might have to run a batsman out who slips down while running. You can choose both ways to do it and only one comes under the spirit of cricket.

[@chrisheggie952]

Good analysis of the play. In the light of England's self righteous indignation what will be the outcome? Will the MCC change the rules? Unlikely in the extreme. Will Australia be reprimanded and warned never to do that again? No way. Or will batters everywhere be told to stay alert and within their crease until the ball is dead? Absolutely, end of story.

[@agmortimer]

You're missing the point - it is an entirely legitimate way to get a batsman out, BUT Bairstow believed that it was the end of the over and that the ball was therefore dead, AND that he had deliberately touched / marked himself "in" before he walked anywhere, AND he wan't trying to gain any advantage whatsoever, AND he was in control of his movements / wasn't overbalancing, for example (like in "more regular" stumping examples) ... Having ducked the bouncer (which Bairstow played from inside his crease anyway), Bairstow DID then touch / mark / scratch inside the crease too (with his foot), probably out of habit but also thinking he was marking himself as "in" prior to then walking down the wicket (as many batsmen do between balls, to inspect / dab the wicket / where the ball just pitched, not just at the end of the over when they go to chat with the other batsman) - Cricketers worldwide do this, this is nothing out of the ordinary at all ... CRUCIALLY, Bairstow did not just play the ball from outside his crease / stay outside of his crease without ever touching back "in" after the ball had passed him and ended up in the hands of Carey (which is when many wicket keepers "shy at the stumps", trying for a long range stumping if the batsman has not reatreated back "in" after the ball has been played / missed / avoided and ended up in the hands of the keeper). In this case / at this time, the umpire at the bowlers end was also preparing to give the bowler his baggy green cap back, therefore also implying that the over was indeed over, and the bowler thought the same, as he prepared to receive his cap from the umpire. HOWEVER, crucially, Carey the keeper HAD received the ball (after Bairstow had ducked under the bouncer) and HAD instantly thrown it at the wicket, without anyone really noticing it (not Bairstow, not the umpire, not even the bowler) until the ball hit the wicket and Carey led the appeal for the "long range stumping" ... By all means, if a batsman has advanced out of his crease during the delivery of the ball (or is batting outside of his crease for the delivery of the ball), and has NOT touched back in to their crease after the ball has passed / been played / missed / avoided, then the batsman is completely at risk of being "stumped" having never touched back "in to their ground" (behind the crease line). HOWEVER, if you watch, you will see that Bairstow not only avoided the ball from within his crease, but all he did very deliberately touch back "in" (scratch or mark inside the crease with is foot) after avoiding the ball. Yes, It is true that he was then absent minded enough to not notice that Carey had thrown / was throwing the ball at the stumps and Bairstow then took those crucial few steps down the wicket and out of his ground but never in the attempt to get an advantage / take a run. BY THE LETTER OF THE LAW, IT'S OUT, but because he did clearly touch back inside the crease before he walked out again, and because he wasn't seeking to gain an advantage, and because he believed it was the end of the over, there is definitely a very grey area to be discussed / interpreted ...

[@yingyang1008]

Yeah - it's not rocket science But I'm yet to see a single pod cast or media pundit capable of describing what actually happened and why it MIGHT be controversial I think IQ levels are falling world wide - people no longer seem able to rationally discuss a subject

[@agmortimer]

@@yingyang1008 Agreed 100% - everyone was too quick to jump on a "controversy bandwaggon"!

[@yingyang1008]

@@agmortimer You'd think at least one 'expert' would have mentioned what you said - not necessarily to say it was the wrong decision, but just to show the other side of the debate Instead it's all super low IQ nonsense - trying to make people angry or laugh One day I'll find a little corner of the internet where people can actually have rational conversations

[@catherinewillis5414]

Correct me if I'm wrong but the spirit of the game is to play to win.

[@kasturirangan1497]

There are so many decisions debatable. Even England's win against NZ in 2019 WC is debatable.

[@sivaonelifelol]

In WC 2019 Kumar Dharmasena and the other umpire did NOT apply the necessary rule which would have denied England the 5 runs which means NZ would have been the champions and no need of SUPER OVER.I agree that the WC 2019 was highly debatable.

[@richardbaxter2057]

Nice summation of what occurred there! 👍🏻👏🏼👏🏼 The only thing I’d add to the mix is this “was the Umpire remiss in not calling “over” in a timely enough fashion”? However, the Umpire hadn’t called “over” and Bairstow was already halfway up the wicket....🙄 The fact is that the Aussies absolutely hate losing. They will do anything to win because second is nowhere and the Aussies haven’t come here to LOSE “The Ashes”, it’s far to important a thing, so every opportunity that becomes available must and will be, utilised! Time for England to “cotton on” and up their game!

[@teddythewonderlizard1448]

Match fixing aside, does any team play a game with the sole intent of losing?

[@kimbo3068]

100% Correct! England has a very Short Memory of Their Exact Same Stumping Manoeuvres! They Need Reminding of this as they Have Amnesia when on the Receiving End! & the Disgusting Actions of the MCC Members have Bought the Game into Disrepute!

[@ujwalaashutoshkelkar2557]

Johnny Bairstow himself is a wicketkeeper & knows very well that unless & until the ball becomes dead when it’s finally settled in the hands of wicket keeper or bowler. Here Alex Carey immediately threw the stumps as soon as he collected the ball . Bairstow shouldn’t have come out of the crease although the ball wasn’t dead. Bairstow is definitely a repeated offender. On day 3 in the same Test he tried to stump out / run out Lambuschagne in similar way.

[@rovak300]

can we talk about the fact that we were missing arguably one of our best bowlers in nathan lyon, yet england couldnt get it done. sour grapes from the poms. they need to learn that tough patient cricket will beat bazz ball any day

[@jamesbustin2837]

I'm English and the hypocrisy is unreal. On both sides. Bairstow was out fair and square, it was a schoolboy error. England had run out a NZ player in virtually the same way last summer! And Broad complaining about cheating is rich too, after his infamous edge to slip.

[@godfreypigott]

So where is the hypocrisy on the Australian side?

[@baabaabaa2293]

@@godfreypigott Aussies won't get MBEs if they win l spose!?!

[@marcusluciani1620]

Good summary. Please post to England

[@FiushBones]

It wasn't luck that bairstow missed on day 3. His throw wasn't even close! Carey showed awareness and skill that bairstow just can't match 😂

[@sandbarsoundbar]

The Umpires on the field did not dismiss the appeal. Why? Because they were not paying attention. They know they stuffed up by not paying attention to what was happening (dead or live ball) and by not calling over. That’s why they went to the third umpire. If the Umpires believed the ball to be dead they would have dismissed the appeal immediately. But they know the rules, and they know they made a mistake as well by getting too comfortable and not paying attention until the ball was deemed dead (and/or calling Over).

[@godfreypigott]

They had no reason to believe the ball was dead.

[@davidwilson5854]

Excellent summary. Well done.

[@alancrombie1847]

If the England wicket keeper had done that he'd have been a national hero get over it.

[@juanitoingles9853]

A few clarifications. How closely were you watching? Marais Erasmus wasn't the umpire. He wasn't even on the field of play to signal dead ball or anything else. His only involvement was as TV umpire for the DRS. What was the umpire at the bowler's end doing whilst Carey was stumping Bairstow? He had turned his back on play and was returning Green's sweater to him. Does a (first class) umpire turn his back on play whilst the ball is still live? I have no doubt that, in his mind, he considered the ball to be dead (all your quotes from the Laws are said to be 'in the opinion of the umpire'). He could easily have called over and it is only because he had not, by the time the ball hit the stumps, that there was a decision to make at all. Trust me, the umpire will have been criticised when the team of officials sat down for the debrief after the game and he will learn from his embarrassing mistake. My understanding (though I did not watch the whole test on TV) is that Bairstow had tried to run out batsmen who were batting outside their crease and had not yet recovered their ground, which is completely different from taking the same action when someone is within their ground and only leaves it when he believes the ball to be dead. Call Bairstow naive if you want - after all anyone who plays professional sport in a sporting manner in this day and age is naive in the extreme, I suppose. The Aussies did not cheat, it is true and it was reasonable for the officials to give Bairstow out, according to the Laws of cricket. However, Pat Cummins referred, in his press conference, to our 'shared love of the game', but many of us love it, in part, because of the way it is (or should be) played. It shouldn't be played like that, IMHO.

[@divinelove910]

Bairstow was out because he proceed to walk out of the crease before the ball was dead. That was his (Bairstow's) fault

[@AsphodeliaD]

But the real issue is whether it's a good thing for a player to be out in this way. I was at Lord's and watching from a good position. It was immediately clear that Bairstow was out, and legitimately so. He was careless in wandering out of his crease, (but he also scraped his foot in the crease as if to underline his sense the ball was dead). So he was careless, and he was legitimately 'stumped' - but we all also somehow intuitively knew this was not really a legitimate way for Australia to steal a wicket. You can call it 'a stroke of genius', or you can call it cunning and underhand. Either way I think it leaves a bad taste in the mouth and people know that something has been undermined in the game. It's the same with 'mankadding' - yes, it's 'legitimate' but it's also not how anyone wants to see a player dismissed. The spirit of the game comes first remember. I also happen to agree that the response of the English players and the crowd was also not in the spirit of the game.

[@GeoffTheChefOfficial]

Great video. Very thorough. 👏

[@rastusbaker]

Spot on. Looks like England want to Brexit from Rules of Cricket too now.

[@perpetualgrin5804]

Other countries who don't play cricket have not a clue what this is about. Only for the educated that play cricket😅.

[@boingboing6115]

Very good summary sir!

[@mickbrave8351]

Johnny Bairstow's attempt "at the same thing" is not the same thing because the batsman took his stance outside of the crease and therefore was always potentially vulnerable to a swift return. Bairstow batted within his crease and made a point of dabbing his foot behind the line before leaving his ground. However, it is correct to point out that Carey did release the ball immediately and therefore the ball was not dead at the time, but the reasoning behind the throw is totally different.

[@tast7017]

excellent cricket awareness from the Australians