George Bailey defends Australia’s appeal against Ben Stokes for field obstruction

George Bailey defended Australia's decision to appeal against Ben Stokes for obstructing the field.

Former Australian skipper, George Bailey defended Australia’s decision to appeal against Ben Stokes for obstructing the field and siad that England skipper, Eoin Morgan should recall the decisions suffered by his batsmen as the wrong one and should have overturned Stoke’s decision based on his umpiring views. Bailey undoubtedly backed the decision of Australian skipper, Steven Smith taking the right call on wicketkeeper, Matthew Wade‘s appeal. The appeal was done after Stokes put his hand in the way of a follow-up throw from bowler Mitchell Starc that could have led to a possible run out, reports The Age. SCORECARD: Australia vs England, 3rd ODI at Manchester, ENG won by 93 runs

“‘Wadey’ had a good view of it behind the stumps. He said straight away that he thought the ball was missing ‘Stokesy’ and it was going to hit the stumps, so he appealed and we went upstairs and the umpire gave it out. The way I saw it was he was out of his ground and he wilfully put his hand out, which is [against] the rule I’ve been told, and he got given out by the umpire,” said Smith. Brendon McCullum says Steven Smith might live to regret ‘obstructing the field’ dismissal against Ben Stokes

Stokes was the seventh player in the hostory of international cricket to be given out on obstructing the field, while the crowd at Lord’s was filled with boos and jeers for the Australian side. Morgan, on the other hand, was against the decision and felt that the decision should have been upheld as it was not a deliberate act, but an act as a human being in order to protect himself.

“I feel that the ball was thrown so fast that you can only react in a way that defends yourself and he put his hand up to protect himself and followed the ball … how you can interpret is open, but certainly I didn’t think it was deliberate,” he was quoted saying. He also said that had England been in Australia’s position, they would not have gone up for the appeal. Bailey too said that if the ball was not in the trajectory of hitting the stumps, Australia would not have appealed. Ben Stokes: I was just defending myself from getting hit

“I think the correct decision was made. I don’t think the ball was going to hit him. I think the ball was going to hit the stumps, and he was out of his crease. I don’t think there was any need for him to put his hand up to defend himself,” said Bailey. “The crowd got into it, which was great, but once the emotion is taken out of it I’m very comfortable with the fact we thought the ball was going to hit the stumps, he’s out of his crease. To give it a different slant, if he’d hit the ball to cover and the throw was from cover and he was that far out of his crease and he put his hand up I think the same thing. Something similar did happen to the same bloke in the [Lord’s] Test match, didn’t it? That [getting back to his crease] might be something he needs to work on,” he added.

Bailey praised Smith to act logically, and also questioned Morgan’s call on not having appealed had England been in Australia’s position. “He’s obviously very emotional about it still – and that’s fine, he was out there – but we think the ball was going to hit the stumps, he was out of his crease and he put his hand up when the ball wasn’t going to hit him anyway,” said Bailey. Ben Stokes dismissal: Kumar Dharmasena sympathises with batsman

“I think if the ball was going to go four metres wide [of the stumps] I don’t think we would’ve appealed. It was the fact we thought the ball was going to hit the stumps – and if he didn’t put his hand up we’d have known if the ball was going to hit the stumps. It’s a big call for Eoin to say that. I assume if that’s how he feels then any time a batter nicks one onto his pad and get given out lbw, or gets wrongfully given out caught behind, he’ll call them back as well. That’s his prerogative as captain,” he added.

Bailey also refrained himself from from commenting on the decision being taken by the third upmire and was not handled by the on-field umpires, while Kumar Dharmasena had claimed to Morgan that he felt Stokes was not out. “I’ve got no issues with that. I think we’ve got fantastic technology now and I think that allowed the third or fourth umpire to go through and double-check that rule. I think the key words there were ‘wilfully’ and whether it was in self-defence. The ball wasn’t going to hit him so it’s not really self defence, and [in regards to wilfully] he stuck his hand out to stop it hitting the stumps,” he concluded. Ben Stokes and others who have been dismissed obstructing the field

About the Author