Cricket- the sport not the insect

[Spider1964]

How funny...

 

[Waterloo Sunrise]

3 incorrect decisions? BS.
1. Chris Rogers LBW in first dig. Shocking call to give it out live. DRS shows it JUST clipping, hence umpires call. He was stiff.
2. Phil Hughes' LBW in the second dig. Looked to pitch outside leg live. DRS shows it 50/50 on the line? He was stiff.

So your argument against there only being 3 incorrect decisions is to list 2 correct decisions you didn't like.

You might as well argue that 10.1 should not be allowable as a winning entry in a 'name numbers greater than 10' competition.

Both players used their pad to prevent a ball which would have hit the stumps from hitting the stumps, and both balls met all the required conditions of the lbw law.

As for the stumping - I'd gladly take that luck if it went my way, but you're really pushing it to deny it was luck. When Glen Mcgrath, Jim Maxwell, Tom Moody & all 4 Aussies in my office agree it was out, the case is pretty closed for me.

 

[darwin553]

i) Non award of a stumping, giving Australia 145 extra runs.

So it was clear cut in your opinion and there was no doubt at all?

 

[darwin553]

No partisanship from me your honour (or should I call you a clown?), the very nature of DRS decision making is that they can go either way... if you don't see this then you don't understand the review system.

I wouldn't worry about him Spider...this is from the same person that, in all of his 25 years of watching the game, thinks there was nothing wrong with the Rogers' lb.

 

[Spider1964]

So your argument against there only being 3 incorrect decisions is to list 2 correct decisions you didn't like.

You might as well argue that 10.1 should not be allowable as a winning entry in a 'name numbers greater than 10' competition.

Both players used their pad to prevent a ball which would have hit the stumps from hitting the stumps, and both balls met all the required conditions of the lbw law.

As for the stumping - I'd gladly take that luck if it went my way, but you're really pushing it to deny it was luck. When Glen Mcgrath, Jim Maxwell, Tom Moody & all 4 Aussies in my office agree it was out, the case is pretty closed for me.

Gee whiz you're a cantankerous old girl Sunshine, I listed 2 50/50 calls, forgive me for giving 2 examples, I could have listed more but and please do correct me if I'm wrong, I said "2 calls that come to mind". All I said was that they were stiff. End of. Pretty sure I also mentioned that the better team won, so obviously I'm not saying that the DRS decisions cost Australia a win.

As for your examples of what constitutes the Agar stumping being out... well forgive me if I don't close cases on the opinion of ex-players, commentators and 4 Aussies in your office. I choose to go by the evidence presented to my very own eyes.

 

[Waterloo Sunrise]

So it was clear cut in your opinion and there was no doubt at all?

Correct, and the umpteen Aussie pundits I listed above, including that well known Pommie sympathiser Glen McGrath (incidentally, had no idea he sounded so effete) agreed.

 

[Waterloo Sunrise]

Gee whiz you're a cantankerous old girl Sunshine, I listed 2 50/50 calls, forgive me for giving 2 examples, I could have listed more but and please do correct me if I'm wrong, I said "2 calls that come to mind". All I said was that they were stiff. End of. Pretty sure I also mentioned that the better team won, so obviously I'm not saying that the DRS decisions cost Australia a win.

As for your examples of what constitutes the Agar stumping being out... well forgive me if I don't close cases on the opinion of ex-players, commentators and 4 Aussies in your office. I choose to go by the evidence presented to my very own eyes.

The point is not how many you listed, it's that they weren't incorrect calls.

They matched the requirement of an LBW exactly, so complaining about them is silly. The 3 decisions I listed were straightforwardly incorrect on matters of fact (umpires failing to correctly identify contact and which side of lines objects were on). There is no misapplication in your examples - they're just tight, but correct.

Your eyes are seeing what they want to see if they believe any part of Agar's boot was behind the line within 5 frames of the bails being removed.

 

[Spider1964]

The point is not how many you listed, it's that they weren't incorrect calls.

They matched the requirement of an LBW exactly, so complaining about them is silly. The 3 decisions I listed were straightforwardly incorrect on matters of fact (umpires failing to correctly identify contact and which side of lines objects were on). There is no misapplication in your examples - they're just tight, but correct.

Your eyes are seeing what they want to see if they believe any part of Agar's boot was behind the line within 5 frames of the bails being removed.

Go and read what I said again... I said they were stiff... not incorrect. Obviously you believe DRS to be infallible. Good for you. I'm not so sure.

We don't get the same commentators... but Mike Atherton and Ian Botham (probably not renowned Aussie lovers?), both agreed with the Agar stumping call being given not out. Funny game isn't it. Everyone sees it differently.

 

[Waterloo Sunrise]

The word stiff applies to my joints, and other people's golf shots, so I'm still not clear what you're trying to imply by it. If it's that they were tight but correct (given that you accept they're not incorrect) then that is all I ever said.

The non DRS replay of the Hughes decision, with the stump lines drawn down the pitch, suggested it was even more in line that hawk eye believed.

 

[Alphabet]

I really would have been happier if we lost by 80 instead of getting so close. It really ruined my mood, but then Ventoux and Froome cheered me right up.

In other cricket news, Shahid Afridi (he's only 16 you know! ) delivered probably the best ever individual performance in one day cricket. Scored 76 off 55 balls, while the rest of Pak-i-stan combined managed just 120 from 245 balls, and then took 7/12 with the ball. Amazing .

 

[Cyivel]

I wouldn't worry about him Spider...this is from the same person that, in all of his 25 years of watching the game, thinks there was nothing wrong with the Rogers' lb.

Given that you demonstrated earlier that you don't know how the review system actually works I'm not sure you're in a position to talk about this, although keep bringing up the Rogers lbw, as your fellow Australian said it's only making you look bad, again there is a difference between saying I think he could have got the benefit of the doubt or it was 'shocking' or 'one of the worst decisions' I can remember, the Broad decision would fit into those categories not the Rogers one.

The fact that some people don't seem to understand this shows that either they don't know much about cricket or are letting blind nationalism get in the way.

 

[Cyivel]

Edit: I've deleted my above post as I can't be bothered going back and forth over old ground when nothing new is going to be said on either side, it kind of annoys me when I see that with other people, so should hold myself same standard

I really would have been happier if we lost by 80 instead of getting so close. It really ruined my mood, but then Ventoux and Froome cheered me right up.

In other cricket news, Shahid Afridi (he's only 16 you know! ) delivered probably the best ever individual performance in one day cricket. Scored 76 off 55 balls, while the rest of Pak-i-stan combined managed just 120 from 245 balls, and then took 7/12 with the ball. Amazing .

It was fantastic, I missed him batting live but caught his bowling, he overshadowed a pretty damn good performance from the 21 year old West Indian bowler Holder who took 4-13 in 10 overs.

 

[movingtarget]

I really would have been happier if we lost by 80 instead of getting so close. It really ruined my mood, but then Ventoux and Froome cheered me right up.

In other cricket news, Shahid Afridi (he's only 16 you know! ) delivered probably the best ever individual performance in one day cricket. Scored 76 off 55 balls, while the rest of Pak-i-stan combined managed just 120 from 245 balls, and then took 7/12 with the ball. Amazing .

Yeah it was hard to take. The lunch break did not help. I thought they both were playing well although there were few close calls especially for Pattinson but credit to England, Anderson is just so consistent and England would be lost without him. Swann was off his game but bowled well in patches. Finn was terrible while Broad was not too bad. Our batsmen only have themselves to blame and it was an exciting game but after that I knew Cadel would have a shocker on Ventoux which he did of course ! Although Porte kept the flag flying and caused a lot of suffering to Froome's rivals.

 

[darwin553]

Simon Katich possibly being shaped up for a return.

http://www.foxsports.com.au/cricket...-ashes-top-order/story-e6frf3gl-1226679615203

 

[Waterloo Sunrise]

Simon Katich possibly being shaped up for a return.

http://www.foxsports.com.au/cricket...-ashes-top-order/story-e6frf3gl-1226679615203

#notdesperate.

He's been alright for us at Lancashire, but that 200 was full of chances, and I can't see why he'd want the hassle.

 

[movingtarget]

Simon Katich possibly being shaped up for a return.

http://www.foxsports.com.au/cricket...-ashes-top-order/story-e6frf3gl-1226679615203

Should not have been dumped in the first place. If Rogers and Cowan can make the team, Katich is also good enough but I doubt that the Aussies will go down that path. It sounds like Jackson Bird will be in for Starc hopefully Khawaja for Cowan.

 

[Waterloo Sunrise]

Turning up with no left armers against Cook when you have a passable option would be a very odd choice.

 

[darwin553]

Turning up with no left armers against Cook when you have a passable option would be a very odd choice.

I always had it in the back of my mind that Siddle wouldn't perform in the first test and in a way I was right because he was lucky to get that 5 for in the 1st innings as he did bowl a lot of rubbish.

I think someone like Harris or Bird can ask many more questions of the English batsmen than Siddle can with their ability to move the ball both in the air and off the pitch.

So as you can see I am arguing for Starc to hold his place.

 

[movingtarget]

Turning up with no left armers against Cook when you have a passable option would be a very odd choice.

Kind of strange that Australia has so many left handed batsmen and England has all right handed bowlers. The other option is to play an extra bowler and leave Starc in but that leaves the batting pretty thin although without Cowan probably no noticeable difference. Not sure why Steve Smith did not bowl in the first test especially when Bell was batting in the second innings and the Aussie attack was not doing much. Can't see them dropping Siddle.

 

[Zam_Olyas]

"Australia are going into the second Test in a better position than England and have the momentum." - Warne

 

[darwin553]

Kind of strange that Australia has so many left handed batsmen and England has all right handed bowlers. The other option is to play an extra bowler and leave Starc in but that leaves the batting pretty thin although without Cowan probably no noticeable difference. Not sure why Steve Smith did not bowl in the first test especially when Bell was batting in the second innings and the Aussie attack was not doing much. Can't see them dropping Siddle.

Same I can't see them dropping Siddle but that doesn't mean they shouldn't.

Re. Steve Smith - the situation that Australia found themselves in during both innings, except for when Bell and Broad had their decent partnership, probably didn't warrant Smith to bowl as it might have been deemed by Clarke to be too risky a move.

 

[movingtarget]

Same I can't see them dropping Siddle but that doesn't mean they shouldn't.

Re. Steve Smith - the situation that Australia found themselves in during both innings, except for when Bell and Broad had their decent partnership, probably didn't warrant Smith to bowl as it might have been deemed by Clarke to be too risky a move.

Can understand that but he's there as an all rounder and did not bowl in either innings although from what I have seen recently his batting is better than his bowling. I hope Harris gets into the team at some stage, I think he will trouble the English batsmen, would also be good to see Cummins back for the next series if fit.

 

[darwin553]

Can understand that but he's there as an all rounder and did not bowl in either innings although from what I have seen recently his batting is better than his bowling.

With the way he performed in India and in the practice games so far in England, Clarke and Boof are probably viewing him more as a specialist batsman that can bowl a little bit rather than a batting all-rounder who also gives them a bowling option.

 

[movingtarget]

With the way he performed in India and in the practice games so far in England, Clarke and Boof are probably viewing him more as a specialist batsman that can bowl a little bit rather than a batting all-rounder who also gives them a bowling option.

Talking of Clarke it's interesting that the captain is no longer one of the selectors but he probably still has some pull. Sounds like the ex coach is now mouthing off about problems between Watson and Clarke while suing Cricket Australia for $4,000,000.00

 

[darwin553]

Sounds like the ex coach is now mouthing off about problems between Watson and Clarke while suing Cricket Australia for $4,000,000.00

Yeah saw that.

The two interesting things to come out from the papers he has filed with the courts is that Watson was Arthur's source for Warner's bar incident with Root - was there a possible motive for Watson to spill the beans given he is now opener?

And the racial discrimination aspect to his case that he feels that he didn't get the support of CA when he was coaching and enforcing penalties like the one he gave to those four players who didn't give a presentation because he was South African.

Surprisingly, Watson was one of those four players but yet he seemed to be the source of the information to Arthur about Warner, interesting...

http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/spo...ormer-coach-mickey-arthur-20130716-2q26s.html