EDIT: Original post was based on the BBC article and also a few others from India about Smith Having a leg injury, he doesn’t, he has an arm/elbow or upper limb injury. The BBC is still running this as a leg injury, but as Brandon from the cricket corollary pointed out, in the SA the phsyio is quoted as saying it is his arm that is injured. Arm/Leg, same same.
So the post below, brilliant as it obviously is, is not correct. But I still like the phrase “This decision is based on Graeme’s current upper limb dysfunction.”
The other night Graeme Smith said he had cramp, and that he wanted a runner.
Strauss and the umpires weren’t comfortable with giving a runner for cramp and denied the request.
I was happy, Smith was pissed off, the world keeps turning.
Then I read this:
“South Africa captain Graeme Smith has pulled out of next month’s Champions League Twenty20 tournament in order to ensure he is fit to face England. Smith, who plays for the Cape Cobras, has been struggling with a leg injury, despite scoring 141 in a losing cause against England on Sunday. “
If he had a leg injury coming into that match, then he would not have been able to call for a runner.
From the laws of cricket:
“1. Substitutes and runners
(a) If the umpires are satisfied that a player has been injured or become ill after the nomination of the players, they shall allow that player to have
(i) a substitute acting instead of him in the field.
(ii) a runner when batting.
Any injury or illness that occurs at any time after the nomination of the players until the conclusion of the match shall be allowable, irrespective of whether play is in progress or not.”
If the leg injury was so bad he is not being sent to India for the Champion’s League, and he didn’t actually injure himself in this match, then this is gloriously dodgy.
I do not doubt he had cramp (not a fat joke, he looks slim to me), but he also had a pre-existing leg injury, which should have meant that he couldn’t ask for a runner under the rules of cricket.
The cunning prick probably thought he was getting around his injury by using the cramp, and then Strauss ruined that.
The SA team physiotherapist said he should be out of cricket for 4-6 weeks.
Being that it appears he didn’t pick the injury up against England, and it was serious enough to keep him out of action for a month the question has to be asked, was Graeme Smith cheating when he called for a runner?
I’ve grown to not despise Graeme Smith of recent times.
He is still not my favourite cricketer, but I do love his ability to play hurt.
That doesn’t mean he isn’t a cheat.
Not that cheating means I will turn against him, I sort of respect him more.
It should also be said I respect who ever uttered this:
“This decision is based on Graeme’s current upper limb dysfunction.”