England v Australia, 2nd Investec Test, Lord's, 3rd day July 20, 2013

CA apologise for 'inappropriate' tweet

  shares 29

Cricket Australia has apologised for a rogue, ribald tweet in reaction to Ian Bell's survival of an appeal for a catch by Steve Smith on day three of the Lord's Test.

Bell was on 3 when he sliced Ryan Harris low to Smith in the gully. Smith appeared to take a clean catch but Bell stood his ground. The umpires conferred and after the third umpire, Tony Hill, viewed video evidence the batsman was spared.

Australia's players were surprised at the decision, with Smith visibly unhappy that his word had not been accepted. Amid widespread condemnation of Hill's call, the official CA Twitter account gave vent to Australian frustrations with the words "That decision sucked ass #bulls***".

The tweet was soon deleted, and a subsequent apology suggested the words had not been typed from Lord's: "Apologies for the inappropriate tweet earlier regarding the Bell catch. It didn't emanate from CA's official Twitter presence at Lord's. CA is currently investigating the matter."

The official CA Twitter account is accessible to numerous staff members within CA, used as it is for a wide variety of announcements, updates and links.

Daniel Brettig is an assistant editor at ESPNcricinfo. He tweets here

Comments have now been closed for this article

  • on July 26, 2013, 4:38 GMT

    Benefit of the doubt on the catch... Why aren't we discussing Agar's stumping or Trott's inside edge in the 1st innings of the 1st Test? Because England are smashing Aus to pieces. That's why...

  • DustBowl on July 21, 2013, 10:42 GMT

    Lucky Bell - two near misses before 10; then what would the Bellophiles have said? Could he have asked Smith? Poor Smith who made an honest catch. Perhaps we should ask Steve Waugh, now on ICC committee about how catches should be treated (ref Lara)

  • Lankyone on July 21, 2013, 9:50 GMT

    Jonathan-E should note that there is nothing in the Laws that dictate the benefit of any doubt be given to the batsman - Common Justice demands however that any doubt be given to the batsman - he has the single chance, the bowling side has a chance with every ball bowled. The ultimate solution is to look at the scorebook, that should tell everyone the ultimate outcome. If, as many TV pundits tell us, it is difficult to tell what the true situation is due to foreshortening of the images then DON'T use it!

  • GENERALZED on July 21, 2013, 9:38 GMT

    I agree whole hardheartedly with Geoff Boycott who said that Umpire Erasmus never had the guts to make the correct decision and took the easy way out by referring it to the 3rd Umpire, who had no option on the TV evidence to give it not out. Its a shame a players word, is not good enough any more. Why have Umpires at Square leg give any decisions at all, when you have the 3rd Umpire being used extensively, to make all their decisions.

  • nrlman on July 21, 2013, 9:33 GMT

    I'll admit it, Australia are no longer GOOG enough! lol I don't think there were any problems with the Root or Agar decisions in the first test. Trott - absolutely but hot spot was unavailable. As for Agar it was difficult to see if he was in or out due to the black soles of his shoes & the shadow over the crease so he shouldn't have been given out.

    The Broad one was obvious & was a howler. Rogers & Hughes were badly done by in this test as well.

    And why are the umpires checking the Australian no-balls all the time & not England's. Half of them aren't even close to a no-ball.

    Whilst Bell was quite within his rights to stand firm, he should have been given out - the catch obviously carried & anyone who didn't think so should get a better tv. Gower thought it was out - enough said!

    It is time for DRS to go to the 3rd umpire for all decisions & he can re-instate batsmen for incorrect calls.

  • on July 21, 2013, 8:45 GMT

    Looks like Australian board is more of apologising more these days. Australian team used to trash every team like this in the past when Warne, Mc gratch,Hayden, Waugh, Gilchrist, Ponting etc use to play. So how do other teams feel. Frustration do brings out those kind of words which CA has twetted. So, I understand but seriously CA has made forcefully retire some good players in their team, so now unless captain comes back to his best form nothing will happen to this team batting fortunes. Shane Watson as opener is risking the best batsman in the top, so, they should ask Hughes to open the innings and bring Watson little lower in the batting order. What ever DRS is playing with Australia team.

  • rahulkmc on July 21, 2013, 6:23 GMT

    @Iqbal: I am referring to technology as a whole, not just the reviews initiated by players. Its high time the third umpires stop hiding behind the 'no conclusive proof' clause every single time. And if they want to do it, then they have to be consistent. Either way, I am pretty sure more people like me are in two minds about the way technology is being handled at this point than it was before the start of this series. ICC needs to act fast or I am seeing lots of money down the drain.

  • on July 21, 2013, 4:59 GMT

    Australians have to go back in history before neutral umpire. The Australian umpires rarely give lbw or run outs decisions to the home team(refer Michael Holding comments) even if it was evident. But for the visitors it was other way round. During Monkey-gate series with India Australians were appealing for catch not taken and Pointing itself was acting like a umpire. Come on Aussies don't be a cry baby when things go against you weep like a baby and call foul. Be a man a take the punch, above all the team is sub standard and pathetic. It's 5-0

  • on July 21, 2013, 4:44 GMT

    General standards of umpiring and DRS-ing have been quite poor through the series actually and while the English have been quite superior in this test, they would have struggled in the earlier test had broad been given out.

    Australia on their part are desperately missing Hussey - the Orange Cap winner from IPL.

  • skkh on July 21, 2013, 2:41 GMT

    Why do we find an excuse and question the umpire's decisions? Smith's catch was doubtful and as an Australian I do not find the umpire's call wrong. What should be debated and at some length too is our batting disgrace time and again. Anyone still thinking about a fightback should have more faith in our batting than I do. Our batting is in shambles and that includes Clarke. He has failed as have the rest of them. We have always dubbed the pommies as whinging but of late we have become better at this art.

  • on July 26, 2013, 4:38 GMT

    Benefit of the doubt on the catch... Why aren't we discussing Agar's stumping or Trott's inside edge in the 1st innings of the 1st Test? Because England are smashing Aus to pieces. That's why...

  • DustBowl on July 21, 2013, 10:42 GMT

    Lucky Bell - two near misses before 10; then what would the Bellophiles have said? Could he have asked Smith? Poor Smith who made an honest catch. Perhaps we should ask Steve Waugh, now on ICC committee about how catches should be treated (ref Lara)

  • Lankyone on July 21, 2013, 9:50 GMT

    Jonathan-E should note that there is nothing in the Laws that dictate the benefit of any doubt be given to the batsman - Common Justice demands however that any doubt be given to the batsman - he has the single chance, the bowling side has a chance with every ball bowled. The ultimate solution is to look at the scorebook, that should tell everyone the ultimate outcome. If, as many TV pundits tell us, it is difficult to tell what the true situation is due to foreshortening of the images then DON'T use it!

  • GENERALZED on July 21, 2013, 9:38 GMT

    I agree whole hardheartedly with Geoff Boycott who said that Umpire Erasmus never had the guts to make the correct decision and took the easy way out by referring it to the 3rd Umpire, who had no option on the TV evidence to give it not out. Its a shame a players word, is not good enough any more. Why have Umpires at Square leg give any decisions at all, when you have the 3rd Umpire being used extensively, to make all their decisions.

  • nrlman on July 21, 2013, 9:33 GMT

    I'll admit it, Australia are no longer GOOG enough! lol I don't think there were any problems with the Root or Agar decisions in the first test. Trott - absolutely but hot spot was unavailable. As for Agar it was difficult to see if he was in or out due to the black soles of his shoes & the shadow over the crease so he shouldn't have been given out.

    The Broad one was obvious & was a howler. Rogers & Hughes were badly done by in this test as well.

    And why are the umpires checking the Australian no-balls all the time & not England's. Half of them aren't even close to a no-ball.

    Whilst Bell was quite within his rights to stand firm, he should have been given out - the catch obviously carried & anyone who didn't think so should get a better tv. Gower thought it was out - enough said!

    It is time for DRS to go to the 3rd umpire for all decisions & he can re-instate batsmen for incorrect calls.

  • on July 21, 2013, 8:45 GMT

    Looks like Australian board is more of apologising more these days. Australian team used to trash every team like this in the past when Warne, Mc gratch,Hayden, Waugh, Gilchrist, Ponting etc use to play. So how do other teams feel. Frustration do brings out those kind of words which CA has twetted. So, I understand but seriously CA has made forcefully retire some good players in their team, so now unless captain comes back to his best form nothing will happen to this team batting fortunes. Shane Watson as opener is risking the best batsman in the top, so, they should ask Hughes to open the innings and bring Watson little lower in the batting order. What ever DRS is playing with Australia team.

  • rahulkmc on July 21, 2013, 6:23 GMT

    @Iqbal: I am referring to technology as a whole, not just the reviews initiated by players. Its high time the third umpires stop hiding behind the 'no conclusive proof' clause every single time. And if they want to do it, then they have to be consistent. Either way, I am pretty sure more people like me are in two minds about the way technology is being handled at this point than it was before the start of this series. ICC needs to act fast or I am seeing lots of money down the drain.

  • on July 21, 2013, 4:59 GMT

    Australians have to go back in history before neutral umpire. The Australian umpires rarely give lbw or run outs decisions to the home team(refer Michael Holding comments) even if it was evident. But for the visitors it was other way round. During Monkey-gate series with India Australians were appealing for catch not taken and Pointing itself was acting like a umpire. Come on Aussies don't be a cry baby when things go against you weep like a baby and call foul. Be a man a take the punch, above all the team is sub standard and pathetic. It's 5-0

  • on July 21, 2013, 4:44 GMT

    General standards of umpiring and DRS-ing have been quite poor through the series actually and while the English have been quite superior in this test, they would have struggled in the earlier test had broad been given out.

    Australia on their part are desperately missing Hussey - the Orange Cap winner from IPL.

  • skkh on July 21, 2013, 2:41 GMT

    Why do we find an excuse and question the umpire's decisions? Smith's catch was doubtful and as an Australian I do not find the umpire's call wrong. What should be debated and at some length too is our batting disgrace time and again. Anyone still thinking about a fightback should have more faith in our batting than I do. Our batting is in shambles and that includes Clarke. He has failed as have the rest of them. We have always dubbed the pommies as whinging but of late we have become better at this art.

  • Blokker on July 21, 2013, 0:06 GMT

    Umpiring decisions usually go for the home team on average, so that a visiting team needs to get 11 wickets and has only 9 to work with. That's just how it is and one of the perks of playing at home - and one of the challenges of playing away.

  • Jonathan_E on July 21, 2013, 0:01 GMT

    Let's put it this way:

    (1) The umpire was in doubt as to whether the ball carried:

    (2) That is why he referred it to the television replay. Which was also in doubt.

    (3) By the law of cricket, the benefit of the doubt must be given to the batsman. The point of television replays - whether referred there at the request of the umpire, or the request of one of the teams - is to reduce the amount of doubt: but if both the Umpire and the Replay cannot say better than "maybe, maybe not", then THERE IS DOUBT. And the benefit of that doubt must be given to the batsman.

    (4) The fact that the umpire referred it to the replay camera, indicates a sufficient level of doubt, that BY THE LAWS OF CRICKET he would not have been permitted to give the batsman out, if there was no replay camera to refer to.

    And Bell was perfectly within his rights not to walk: it was certainly not clear from *his* angle whether the ball carried or not. Bell hit the ball: but that wasn't the question.

  • Iqbal_Hasan on July 20, 2013, 19:01 GMT

    @SollyOlly Goodness me you have a short memory.... may I remind you of the decisions that went against Trott and Root... and the one that went for Agar? Now how long ago was that?...... a WEEK!

    oh... and Rahul. The Bell decision had absolutely nothing to do with DRS - it was an umpire referral

  • hhillbumper on July 20, 2013, 18:53 GMT

    Twitter causes Aus cricket more issues than any bowling attack.

  • AndyMick on July 20, 2013, 18:25 GMT

    Guys get over this DRS thing, Aussies had good decisions also ( Root and Trott batting in first test and Agar when fielding). Decisions over the series even them selves out, always have and always will, with or without DRS. solution, give them all to the umpires, on and off the field (umpires that is), that way MORE decisions will be correct, the catch or not scenario has been around BEFORE DRS, so don't blame it for that. On top of tat, Australia may perform better as THEY (the players) don't have to gamble for wickets! The truth is that overall Engand are ar, far stronger than Australia and they (Australia) are now becoming "whinging poms" because they forgot how to produce good test match players due to their dominance for 15 years or more. Border and Waugh must be incensed at he current teams ineptitude, in both batting, bowling, fielding and grasping new technology. Admit it, AUSTRALIA ARE NO LONGER GOOG ENOUGH!!!!!!!!!!!

  • rahulkmc on July 20, 2013, 18:22 GMT

    Really don't see the point in DRS anymore. Wasting millions of $$$ and still getting most 50-50 decisions wrong. YOU DONT NEED DRS to over rule howlers,, they are picked up easily with simple camerawork, thats why they are howlers. So, how has DRS made umpiring better again?

  • on July 20, 2013, 18:20 GMT

    Accurate call. Why apologise?

  • coldcoffee123 on July 20, 2013, 18:17 GMT

    To all those who are saying Smith took a clean catch and the TV umpire needs to get educated about camera angles,.... I have this to say: CASE (A) Let us for a moment assume that Steve took a clean catch and had his fingers covering the ball at all times. Let us further assume that the TV umpire knows all about camera angles and therefore declares it a CLEAN CATCH. Here is a problem with this decision: CASE (B) What if a catch is taken that on cameras looks very similar to the Steve catch, with the only difference being that the ball actually does touch the ground. Now, since the TV umpire is "educated" to ASSUME such catches are clean, he would declare case B to be a clean catch as well. My point is, umpiring is like being a judge. And a judge MUST NOT take decisions on GUT FEELING. When the cameras can not prove a catch was clean, IT IS NOT OUT. Bumbble is spot on. As an umpire, you can not give it out. Period.

  • Trickstar on July 20, 2013, 18:17 GMT

    @strikeforce2003 A fight back lol, even if that was given Aus was still at the time 360 ish runs behind with England 5 wickets in hand. Fact is Smith wasn't sure and none of the Aus team where. When you watch it on play back, Smith doesn't take it cleanly and fumbles it and looks like it could have grounded it before it traps between fingers and forearm, so out of all the ones we've seen like that over the years it's hardly a surprise it wasn't given. Lets be right though, none of the poor calls have made the extra runs that the Agar missed stumping did, now that was a poor call. Add that to the Trott one and it's not just you lot that have had calls go against you, they usually even out over a series though.

  • SollyOlly on July 20, 2013, 18:16 GMT

    Here we go again, ANOTHER decision going against Austraila...not that it would have made much difference to the outcome this time, but still, every single one has gone against them this series! And that was as out as out can be...

    I just hope the Poms don't start whingeing when the wheel of fortune eventually turns, as it surely must. This series has been a write- off ever since Aleem Dar handed the first Test to England last week...if that had been the result it ought to have been, England winning this would simply have made it 1-1, and the Ashes would be ablaze!

  • on July 20, 2013, 18:06 GMT

    find the culprit and make him pay

  • on July 20, 2013, 17:59 GMT

    atleast batsman should have some sportmanship.come on guys win or loose doesnt matter play some good cricket for fans atleast.first broad then bell.they should have walked away

  • ZCFOutkast on July 20, 2013, 17:46 GMT

    "It didn't emanate from CA's official Twitter presence at Lord's" Gremlins are running the show at CA. No wonder things are the way they are. They probably snatched Mitch&Co's homework from underneath Mickey's door too. Warner might want to go over things a little more closely to make sure he really did attempt to uproot Joe.

  • WalkingWicket11 on July 20, 2013, 17:33 GMT

    What? Just an apology and we are done? David Warner got punished for it, why shouldn't CA be punished?

  • strikeforce2003 on July 20, 2013, 17:33 GMT

    Why apologise, yet another 3rd umpire decision gone against the Aussies and worse taking the tempo and the chance of a fightback away from them..This series has seen nasty DRS and 3rd umpy decisions..

  • on July 20, 2013, 16:48 GMT

    David Warner must be sitting somewhere now and laughing at his own board. A big flaw in Cricket Australia could have just been exposed, and every cricket lover/pundit and certainly the cricket administrators/politicians in Australia must be seriously concerned now.

  • DingDong420 on July 20, 2013, 16:44 GMT

    Dont apologise...whats the point of technology if you still get the wrong decision!

    BCCI I salute you!

  • Blade-Runner on July 20, 2013, 16:26 GMT

    Well, if CA can do it, why can't David Warner ???

  • on July 20, 2013, 15:57 GMT

    Why was it inappropriate, whoever tweeted it got it 100% right.

  • No featured comments at the moment.

  • on July 20, 2013, 15:57 GMT

    Why was it inappropriate, whoever tweeted it got it 100% right.

  • Blade-Runner on July 20, 2013, 16:26 GMT

    Well, if CA can do it, why can't David Warner ???

  • DingDong420 on July 20, 2013, 16:44 GMT

    Dont apologise...whats the point of technology if you still get the wrong decision!

    BCCI I salute you!

  • on July 20, 2013, 16:48 GMT

    David Warner must be sitting somewhere now and laughing at his own board. A big flaw in Cricket Australia could have just been exposed, and every cricket lover/pundit and certainly the cricket administrators/politicians in Australia must be seriously concerned now.

  • strikeforce2003 on July 20, 2013, 17:33 GMT

    Why apologise, yet another 3rd umpire decision gone against the Aussies and worse taking the tempo and the chance of a fightback away from them..This series has seen nasty DRS and 3rd umpy decisions..

  • WalkingWicket11 on July 20, 2013, 17:33 GMT

    What? Just an apology and we are done? David Warner got punished for it, why shouldn't CA be punished?

  • ZCFOutkast on July 20, 2013, 17:46 GMT

    "It didn't emanate from CA's official Twitter presence at Lord's" Gremlins are running the show at CA. No wonder things are the way they are. They probably snatched Mitch&Co's homework from underneath Mickey's door too. Warner might want to go over things a little more closely to make sure he really did attempt to uproot Joe.

  • on July 20, 2013, 17:59 GMT

    atleast batsman should have some sportmanship.come on guys win or loose doesnt matter play some good cricket for fans atleast.first broad then bell.they should have walked away

  • on July 20, 2013, 18:06 GMT

    find the culprit and make him pay

  • SollyOlly on July 20, 2013, 18:16 GMT

    Here we go again, ANOTHER decision going against Austraila...not that it would have made much difference to the outcome this time, but still, every single one has gone against them this series! And that was as out as out can be...

    I just hope the Poms don't start whingeing when the wheel of fortune eventually turns, as it surely must. This series has been a write- off ever since Aleem Dar handed the first Test to England last week...if that had been the result it ought to have been, England winning this would simply have made it 1-1, and the Ashes would be ablaze!