TOPIC:

correct Peter but it's not the first time someone has been hit in the head. surely the games lawmakers have a duty of care to all who play the game to ensure they don't get injured by copping a bouncer to the scone. how many times I wonder has a batsman had to retire hurt after being hit on the helmet..quite a lot. i doubt there's ever been any follow up research to see if it has caused lasting effects such as dizzy spells, memory loss, headaches etc. I recall rick darling copped one through the visor at adelaide oval....made a terrible mess to his face. who can forget rick mccosker getting his jaw broken and coming out to bat in the second dig with his face all bandaged up? yes, this is the first time anyone has been killed but what about all the other injuries bouncers have caused?

It is part of the game and part of a bowlers arsenal but no bowler wishes to take a life. Tragic accident is all it was.

I offered an alternative BC, happy to play on green tops for every single cricket game or have bowling machines at each end? If the bouncer was banned then cricket would be finished.

BC wrote: correct Peter but it's not the first time someone has been hit in the head. surely the games lawmakers have a duty of care to all who play the game to ensure they don't get injured by copping a bouncer to the scone. how many times I wonder has a batsman had to retire hurt after being hit on the helmet..quite a lot. i doubt there's ever been any follow up research to see if it has caused lasting effects such as dizzy spells, memory loss, headaches etc. I recall rick darling copped one through the visor at adelaide oval....made a terrible mess to his face. who can forget rick mccosker getting his jaw broken and coming out to bat in the second dig with his face all bandaged up? yes, this is the first time anyone has been killed but what about all the other injuries bouncers have caused?

Well what do you suggest BC I mean if you ban the bouncer as GWS posted you might as well have bowling machines at each end or prepare green tops or face watching boring draws.

Still think there's a massive overreaction by some posters on this site, the thing that makes this incident so bizaare is that the ball hit him in the neck and severed an artery let's put things into perspective.

Talking to somebody who does martial arts and he said the spot he got hit is a lethal strike spot. No matter how many rule changes we make every sport has the ability to cause injury to people who participate.

anchorman wrote: I have only partially read the opening post and my emphatic answer is,

NO, NO, NO.
A knee jerk post wondering about a knee jerk reaction.
It won't happen, so, NO, NO , NO.

Well maybe you should read all of it , the thread was made because the phil Hughes thread was getting hijacked .

[quote="s.

Time would be better spent improving the helmet, the bouncer is used as a way for batsmen to score runs and bowlers to take wickets.[/quote]

Just think that we laughed at Mike Brearly (Pommy Cpt) for wearing a helmet. Time to improve the helmet & give the batsman better protection. We also cried when Kim Hughes was SACKED for continually trying to hook short pitched balls whilst Aussie Cpt wearing a baggy green cap.

Bazza: May be will encourage players to stand still and get hit in the head; because that is what helmets have done to the game; they have encouraged bravado over batsmanship. Take the modern idea of batting out of one's crease to the fast bowlers. The normal response for 150 years of first-class cricket-- had been to bat behind your popping crease and give yourself time to play the bumpers. This was a sensible response to the dangers of playing fast bowlers, especially without helmets. Moving back and across before the bowler bowled also helped in decreasing the chances of being hit. To argue otherwise about the importance of back foot play in batsmanship is to deny cricket history and crocket reality. Bazza, you are right too many people are being hit in the head at all levels of the game: we need to encourage better coaching and the wearring of improved helmets.

anchorman wrote:

Peter North wrote:

anchorman wrote: I have only partially read the opening post and my emphatic answer is,

NO, NO, NO.
A knee jerk post wondering about a knee jerk reaction.
It won't happen, so, NO, NO , NO.

Well maybe you should read all of it , the thread was made because the phil Hughes thread was getting hijacked .

PN ,sorry no offence meant, but I just knew that there would be the bleeding hearts or the PCs who would be jumping up and down ranting and raving about ban the bouncer.
What about the poor bastard who get hit in the nurries from ball that doesn't lift. Let me tell you that that can have horrendous consequences as well.
As some one said about martial arts, ban the kick to the head.
Yes it is so very, very, sad but it was an accident.
What will we do next ban the car because some one got killed!!!!
I am not trying to be funny or a smart arse here just pointing out the flaws in a couple of posters remarks here.
People it was an accident.

Spot on anchor. Perhaps we could get the pc's and bleeding hearts to campaign to ban tackling in rugby - now there's a chance of a serious head injury.

I'm really glad that international cricket has resumed under duress albeit. Despite this tragic incident, the game must go on. So respect to the following today...

New Zealand v Pakistan at Sharjah, UAE (Test Match)
Sri Lanka v England at Colombo, SL (ODI)
Ireland v New Zealand A at Dubai, UAE (List A)
Argentina v Suriname at Fort Lauderdale, USA (Americas T20 qualifier)
Bahamas v Cayman Is. at Fort Lauderdale, USA (Americas T20 qualifier)
Namibia v Kenya at Windhoek, Namibia (Friendly)