The Cycling News forum is looking to add some volunteer moderators with Red Rick's recent retirement. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to
In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.
Thanks!
thrawn said:England obviously wanted to go to lunch so they could pay the umpires. Disgraceful decision to overturn that.
Waterloo Sunrise said:I'm on holiday this week so I'll respond to the troll.
In this match 3 incorrect decisions have occurred. The rest of the 'controversy' was DRS leading to a correct decision, which is only controversial if you're an idiot.
The 3 were -
i) Non award of a stumping, giving Australia 145 extra runs.
ii) Overturning of correct 'not out' decision to give England statistically best batsman a 1st ball duck.
iii) Broad nicking off and getting away with it - hard to quantify when in the middle of the innings, but England ultimately scored 20 more runs from that point than the spread betting predicted before that decision.
The net result is that the result was made artificially close, but the team with the short end of the stick still won.
2-0 in a weeks time.
Cyivel said:The partisan clowns saying that decisions that could go either way are terrible are hilarious, please don't stop and continue to keep me amused for the next month or two.
Spider1964 said:On the wicket, whilst it lasted beautifully, didn't look like a 5th day wicket to me, what about leaving some grass or moisture in the deck? Was the curator told not to water for the 8 days prior to the match? Maybe someone in the England camp rated the Aussie quicks?
1 all in a weeks time.