TOPIC:

Anyone following it?

Quite interesting and some concerning evidence coming out.

It was a tragic accident and hopefully the helmets redesign will prevent any further fatalities. Interesting focus though on the sledging being directed at Hughes on the day including Doug Bollinger allegedly stating that he was going to "kill him" (which he denied saying) and the overuse of short pitched bowling at him. This had no relevance when it came to the fact that thousands of short balls are bowled at batsmen in every grade of cricket every weekend and there are rarely any incidents. This particular ball just hit him in the wrong spot. I really think the Aussies overdo the sledging though which is being highlighted in the current series in South Africa. This is laughable as they are getting their asses whipped and you think they would be as quiet as church mice.

mikeh: I agree with every word you wrote.

Like Mike and Ark.Have to look at helmets.To protect players from similar events happening in the future.
As for the enquiry looking in to onfield tatics bowling to P Huges that day.And the usual on field sledging that day Cmon that's just silly.
Andy Roberts breaking David Hookes jaw in World Series Cricket started the Helmet revolution.Can only remember 2 players that didn't wear helmets Sir Viv and Beefy Botham.But none in recent times.Interesting to see what helmet design they come up with given its a Summer sport played accross the world in warmer weather conditions+ humidity

Interesting one,,,When is a "Sledge" just a sledge and when does it become "a threat to kill" what if that threat is in fact carried out and kills someone as has happened in this case, you have to wonder at the inconsistency in the story, if it was just a "sledge" why would he deny saying it, and if it was untrue why would someone make up a story that he had said it??

There really is no such thing as a tragic "accident", everything has a cause and effect.... aim a rock hard object at someone's head - it may well hit it - we no longer refer to traffic "accidents", they are now crashes as every crash has a cause. The question is, who is responsible? Have the actions of someone been negligent or where they intended???

Recommendations may well include a rule change.

With all due respect to the family and their grief I'm not sure trying to apportion blame or uncovering what he said or she said is going to help anyone much. I really can't see what good is going to come from raking over the coals like this. These things just become play things for parasitic lawyers to pontificate and lecture and make accusatory statements without substantial evidence that, to my way of thinking, only extends the grief.

Dazzler wrote: With all due respect to the family and their grief I'm not sure trying to apportion blame or uncovering what he said or she said is going to help anyone much. I really can't see what good is going to come from raking over the coals like this. These things just become play things for parasitic lawyers to pontificate and lecture and make accusatory statements without substantial evidence that, to my way of thinking, only extends the grief.

Absolutely spot on Daz. The only thing I can see coming out of it is more rule changes because these enquiries are meant to find something. At the end of the day these boys were just playing the sport they love. What I have noticed since this tragic death is now most players wear a helmet with an extra guard to protect around the back of lower skull where Phil Hughes got hit. That obviously highlighted a weakness or vulnerability in the old helmets. Surely that is the sort of change you seek, nothing more and nothing less.

gtrxuone wrote: Like Mike and Ark.Have to look at helmets.To protect players from similar events happening in the future.
As for the enquiry looking in to onfield tatics bowling to P Huges that day.And the usual on field sledging that day Cmon that's just silly.
Andy Roberts breaking David Hookes jaw in World Series Cricket started the Helmet revolution.Can only remember 2 players that didn't wear helmets Sir Viv and Beefy Botham.But none in recent times.Interesting to see what helmet design they come up with given its a Summer sport played accross the world in warmer weather conditions+ humidity

Sir Viv never needed a helmet, he was just to quick and too good, Bothom didn't need one coz his skull was 4 inches thick!!

Senior Seagull wrote:

gtrxuone wrote: Like Mike and Ark.Have to look at helmets.To protect players from similar events happening in the future.
As for the enquiry looking in to onfield tatics bowling to P Huges that day.And the usual on field sledging that day Cmon that's just silly.
Andy Roberts breaking David Hookes jaw in World Series Cricket started the Helmet revolution.Can only remember 2 players that didn't wear helmets Sir Viv and Beefy Botham.But none in recent times.Interesting to see what helmet design they come up with given its a Summer sport played accross the world in warmer weather conditions+ humidity

Sir Viv never needed a helmet, he was just to quick and too good, Bothom didn't need one coz his skull was 4 inches thick!!

Did Ian Chappell wear a helmet during world series cricket? Can't remember seeing him in one although facing Roberts Holding etc you would think he would have.

Baz --I can see what your saying, but if people are looking for someone to blame where does it stop? Can we blame the the MCC, the ACB, the Sydney Cricket Trust, the curator of the pitch, the umpires, is it all the NSW bowlers, or is it just Abbott whom is responsible? Equally you could blame cricket coaches for failling to teach players how to move inside the line of the short-ball. I have said it before, during the bodyline series, only two batsmen were hit, and one, Oldfield, hooked the ball into his head. In short it is a very complex issue, one where it is difficult to apportion blame.