I wonder what the ICC will make of this situation.He, according to the report on rediff,stood his ground despite being ruled out,a decision which was then confirmed through the third umpire.If the umpire's decision is final,then Hayden should have walked.The question is if this will be seen as an action of dissent, or if it will be overlooked totally.The decisions made by governing bodies in cricket are at times hard to understand.
I do not know why the Australians make a big fuss about walking, as if they are doing something great. Our Indian batsmen like G R Viswanath and Mohinder Amarnath and even Gavaskar were walkers when the batsmen around the world were waiting for the Umpires to raise their finger even when they were caught in the slips. Just because one Adam Gilchrist walks doesn't mean all Australians are walkers. Also, these Australians expect others to follow them. Just because they walk (what was practised by others for ages), they are now expecting others also to walk. Recently example being Gilchirst - Mcmillan row. It is time you get a taste of your own medicine.
