*** The Ashes 2013 1st Test 10-14 July Trent Bridge***

Erasmus excapes the Tower......

There was no umpiring error!

Get off the Umpires case.

Bullshit bullshit from football fans!  Learn about cricket!

Ridiculous decision.  All umpires on this match should never see an oval again.


Umpire needed to hear the audio to make a decision.  But his decision indicated he had a clear hotspot.  So why ask for the audio?

Stinks of incompetence.

Those suggesting this was the best test match ever really need to get out more.  The whole game was second rate from the bowling, to the batting.  Go about 10 steps further down the rung to get to where the umpiring was.

i WOULD LIKE TO SEE THAT AGAIN...

BJT = SEETHING

Thanks for coming BJT, do call again soon!

Not really.  I made more on England than I would have on Aus.

Why doesnt third umpire have snicko?

Takes too long

Match odds not settled - are they expecting the decision to be overturned??????

lol

takes too long to build / remove all background noise.. i think was mentioned before

Gower being his exciting self as usual

Shut up you boring **** ****. Audio, hotspot and snicko confirms it. Correct decision was made

Jesus I'm English but to finish on yet another dodgy decision is beyond belief
An example of much too much technology in a sport and most of it inaccurate
Some of the decisions in this test were as poor as any sport I've ever seen
Don't think he nicked it uproar to follow

Jul 14, 2013 -- 2:32PM, markzzz wrote:

Match odds not settled - are they expecting the decision to be overturned??????lol

Money's in my account. But not on daily P&L.

better team won, well done English fans

Lucky Eng had their reviews in hand

when hot spot is not definitive should go to umpires call like those iffy lbws

need a 4th umpire to review the 3rd umpires howlers

Atherton has gone for a valium..

Can't say I could see anything on snicko, but there was a noise, as the ball went past the bat and the bat was far away from his body, could have only been the bat and I agree that the 3rd umpire decisions in this match have been incompetent, to say the least, but that final one wasn't

BJT ranting and raving.

has this ever happened before?

Agree with BJT to a degree,

Certainly not the best test match but bloody exciting for sure!

I backed the draw early.  England batting was pathetic as was Aus to start.  The game should still be going on and the draw coming in to it this afternoon.

This series may well be decided by the batsmen not the bowlers!  Let's hope Anderson gets some treatment on his groin!


England very lucky, Aus unlucky but who cares

Some days ve vin, some days ve lose....today ve vin!

Bjt seems to have got it spot on to me

Hot spot confirmed it, audio confirmed it, snicko confirmed it. BJT calls it a ridiculous decision!

Lots to work on for the second test upstairs, but I'm sure that'll improve out of sight. Better team won, last decision was correct, we move on.

not the best test match in terms of quality of play, but right up there for entertainment.

name me a test match where favouritism has changed more often than this one.

i thought there was a clear deflection from the normal camera view

he wasnt gonna give that out.

can you imagine the uproar if he gave it out and he hadnt hit it?

Why didn't Haddin walk?

Come on 'Rhino' don't hide like you've been doing all morning, normally got loads to say lol

not sure how england were lucky.

if agar had been given out first innings theyd have probably won by 200 runs. swings and wossanames.

I reckon the Aussie last pair could have put a bit more pressure on England in that 30 minutes before lunch. England looked shot to pieces by then, bowlers all over the place and a few more lusty blows could have reduced that target to a dozen or so. Brilliant effort though.

I'm on the draw for Lords!  They can't bat any worse!

That was a lie.........about them batting worse.....you know they can......and will!

australia need to sort their batting out, imo. take out the two 11th wicket stands and they got about 350.

wish they'd won, in a way. would have set the series up much better.

You are right alun ,Haddin should have continued to slog ,but a team that is used to losing will always find a way to lose and he cramped up when he realised he could win ,I posted it just before lunch .

Lots of seething this afternoon.  Must be the weather.

They went by the umpires decisons you ****, England lost at least 150 runs, thanks to the incompetent 3rd umpire, the Aussies lost around 50 runs

That TMB dolt is having his seethes deleted quicker than he can post them.  What a tool.

England won without playing well - meant to be sign of a good team isn't it?

The first innings batting was a disgrace and then allowing the Aussie tailend to score so many in both innings was simply inept.

The umpiring was shocking - and England were definitely more hard done by than Australia by the on field umpires - and but for the review system it could have been disastrous.

Unless the ICC change the policy, it's the three umpires from this game plus Tony Hill for all 10 of the Ashes tests. 8 out of the 12 elite umpires are English or Australian so can't be appointed

fantastic game of cricket, let's agree on that

lots of points to argue but mainly

how did both the on-field and 3rd umpires get so many decisions wrong?

gotta feel sorry for Aussie as things turned out

but if Agar had been given out on 6, as he should, England would have won by 200

thefavourite 14 Jul 13 13:25 
i wonder how it feels to drop the ashes.

tournament over, england cannot recover from this.





my favourite post of the day

Aussies are looking to strengthen their line up on Thursday and will bring in Nathan Lyon for Ed Cowan.

scrap this decision review garbage and let the umpires on the field umpire the game, ffs they're not even confident about no ball calls anymore

no doubt in my mind Aleem Dar gave that last wicket not out because he knew England had reviews and Australia didn't

why is the frame rate on the hotspot replay terrible?  in others sports for unimportant replays they have proper high frame rate equipment.  I don't think the fact the camera is IR (i think?) affects it

aussies have always maintained you play to the umpires decision ALWAYS to justify not walking, so there should be no complaints from any aussies

There are no complaints from aussies tbf.  Not in their cricket camp at least.  A few mugs on here but they dont count cos they are idiots.

what a tit

Broad was right not to walk

Play to the whistle, it's the umpire's mistake, not Broad's

hi

Strangely our players didnt appeal so vociferously for that haddin wicket, almost like they didnt think it was out.

Mind you, this is a funny article...

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/sport/cricket/controversial-dismissal-spoils-dramatic-ending-to-first-test-as-technology-decides-brad-haddins-fate/story-fni2fnmo-1226679324334

Ffs, haddin must have known he was out.

It hardly "spoilt" the ending of the test. Not for me anyway. It was probably the wicket I celebrated most of all time apart from Kasprowicz at Edgbaston.

It was brilliant, nothing was spoilt.It was a great match what more do people want.We won it fair and square there was an edge we all saw it.Wheres the problem?

Of course they didnt appeal massively because no one was certain but there was an edge.Technology proved it.

it was very odd. as it happened live on tv you knew it was out. there was a massive noise as it passed the edge and it looked obviously out but neither the players or commentators were sure. however the crowd went up for it spontaneously not a delayed reaction after the players' halfhearted appeals

What a great match and either team deserved to win it.  England great 2nd innings partnership which set it up, but will always be remembered for the blatant cheat from Broad.  Australia just not good enough with the bat, can't rely on bottom order to make all the runs.
Just a great match and how can anyone say test match cricket is boring!!!!

>>it was very odd. as it happened live on tv you knew it was out.

Yes we knew because we all heard the sound from the comfort of
our lounge with benefit of the ultra sensitive microphones on field
which I'm sure could pick up a fly farting. The players don't have
that luxury.

>>there was a massive noise as it passed the edge and it looked
>>obviously out but neither the players or commentators were
>>sure. however the crowd went up for it spontaneously not a
>>delayed reaction after the players' halfhearted appeals

As if the crowd had any @#$%ing idea if it was out or not. The are
just reacting to the players half-hearted appeal.

>>but if Agar had been given out on 6, as he should, England
>>would have won by 200

As has been stated before, the decision was a close call and the
batsmen was given the benefit of the doubt, as he should be.

BTW, I certainly think Australia didn't deserve to win this test.

Relying on your number 11's to put on century partnerships
must be the most arse backwards way to win a test I've ever
seen and an absolute nightmare for punting.

There are a few positives going forward, Agar is a real talent,
and England's bowling isn't anything special except for
Anderson.

As I see it, your whole Ashes defence depends on Anderson
staying healthy.

Prior heard it and said he def nicked it (according to Swann) which was why Cook referred - the players were prob so uncertain as a result of the strange 3rd ump decisions - not that they would ever say that in public of course! Dar prob heard it (if he didn't he needs a new job) but knowing that Eng had reviews left and confidence being low didn't give it (obv he would never say this in public!).

I heard it first time round. In fact it was so loud i thought my garden shed had fallen down.

Don't know what all the fuss is about tbh.

As has been stated before, the decision was a close call and the
batsmen was given the benefit of the doubt, as he should be.

============================================

total bollox, everyone could see he didn't get back

nd England's bowling isn't anything special except for
Anderson.

As I see it, your whole Ashes defence depends on Anderson
staying healthy.

Nonsense.  Anderson is superb, and had a great match.  But Broad and Swann are of course top notch too, look at their records over the last three years ffs.

Hope to see Onions though if we get a  bit of rain as he would be ideal on `puddings`

There seems to have been a "word" going around about Onions.. That he has lost it.  Bres cant be any worse than Finn, and he can bat a bit.

Everyone knows how good Bresnan is, not least the Aussies. As for Finn he is short of confidence and needs to find some form with Middlesex but he'll be back.

onions had a nightmare warm up game in new zealand. not sure how much div 1 wickets count for. he almost always gets loads for durham at a low average

finn got the 10th wicket partnership going both innings with short wide rubbish. couldn't believe cook threw him the ball before broad on sunday when anderson had to come off.

in a 4 man attack captain has to have full confidence in all 4 and it was pretty clear cook didn't trust him in this match

The whole test was a shambles.  Sure the result was close, and there was enough swings and roundabouts for any average Joe to be able to make money off it, but the quality was way off for all involved.
The final wicket was probably there, but the way it was handled was ridiculous.  The third umpire should never have called for the audio if he was sure there was a nick.  It was simply not needed.  To ask for the audio because he wasn't convinced, and then claim it was out because it was clear hot spot proved it, is just ridiculous.

The umpires are clearly scared, and playing percentages with their decisions.  They don't like technology making them look stupid, and as a result, their reactions are proving to be counterproductive that wish, as they are made to look incompetent to umpire C grade bush cricket.

Did England deserve to win?  Not really.  But then neither did Australia.  Australia were woeful with the bat apart from a select few.
England, woeful also.  How in hell can a 19yo spinner on debut batting number 11 can nearly score a century, in apparantly the best contest in cricket?
Claim he should have been out on 6.  Personally I didn't see it.  But how did he then go on to score another 92?

Clearly England bowling is lacking, as is Australian batting.  England batting apparantly was decent, but yet to see anything more than capable, but then Australian bowling much better than their batting.

There were too many decisions in this match that were questionable.  Too many referred decisions that would have proven opposite given the opposite call from the umpire.  eg umpire calls out, DRS can't prove otherwise, yet if the umpire called not out, DRS wouldn't have been able to reverse that either.
Seriously, when an international batsmen has to ask what he was given out for, you know how bad it is.  That lbw/caught at slip decision of out was probably the craziest decision I have seen in cricket.  Umpires are confused as to their roles.

I get that cricket is trying to keep the tradition of the umpires and increase the accuracy of their decisions, but the reality is technology now shows up everything.  You can't integrate such technology on some decisions and not use it in others.
3rd umpire needs to be in total control of all reviews.  He should be the one. 

At the VERY VERY LEAST, a decision to refer a decision to 3rd umpire, should not be counted as wrong, unless proven wrong.  To lose a review for referring something to 3rd umpire that they can't determine either way should not be counted as a negative review.  They should get it over again. Only time they should lose 1, is if they are totally wrong and time wasting.

I don't believe the result of the test was due to the umpires.  It was a 50/50 game and the calls were that bad that they completely changed the scenarios so we really don't know what would have happened if the correct decisions were given at the start..  But I certainly don't believe in this day and age, that bad decisions averaging out over time, is any way to conduct a business, or play the game of cricket.  We have the ability to get it right, so lets just do that. 

For the record, I think Anderson is an outstanding bowler and England would be way down the ranks without him.

BJT, I don't think people are that interested in you anti-English slant on most things you say, you've marked your own card already.

england have plenty of outstanding players other than anderson. at the very least cook, pietersen, prior, swann and anderson would walk into the best england XI since i've been watching which goes back to the early 80s

Jul 17, 2013 -- 3:23PM, superam wrote:

BJT, I don't think people are that interested in you anti-English slant on most things you say, you've marked your own card already.

Nothing more anti English than that sentence.

Jul 17, 2013 -- 3:51PM, mafeking wrote:

england have plenty of outstanding players other than anderson. at the very least cook, pietersen, prior, swann and anderson would walk into the best england XI since i've been watching which goes back to the early 80s

1. They beat possibly the worst Australian team In 50 years by 14 runs on a pitch designed  for them.
2. Since the 80s? The best XI for a team that lost the Ashes for 2 decades? Really not a big statement. Because they are better In your opininion than very ordinary cricketers for England certainly doesndo qualify them to be good cricketers.

Think you'll find England won the Ashes in 1981 and 1985 here and in 86/87 in Oz BJT. Some good players in those England teams. Grant you Oz were totally

dominant from 1989 to 2002/2003 a period where you produced a slew of great players. Don't kid yourself that there isn't much between these teams, England are far

superior in every department - apart from tail batting. Your boys showed a lot of fight and got the rub of the green re ump decisions and still got beat. With the weather looking

set fair can see Oz going down to a massive defeat in the series.

Draw backers on suicide watch

We r ****. Get Ricky back asap. England aren't much better. South Africans and the Indians will be pissing themselves watching this crap.

lay aussie no fecking chance .

Unbelievable even the drs umpires is incompetent, bell was out for 3 the ball clearly carried on replay to smith every commentator said so and you can see smiths fingers bent back because they're under the ball.

For fark sake even david gower admits it's clearly out!!!

Jul 19, 2013 -- 8:38PM, Try My Best wrote:

We r ****. Get Ricky back asap. England aren't much better. South Africans and the Indians will be pissing themselves watching this crap.

Don't kid yourself, they lost interest long ago.  No chance they are still watching.

Jul 18, 2013 -- 7:17AM, Captain Wurzel wrote:

Think you'll find England won the Ashes in 1981 and 1985 here and in 86/87 in Oz BJT. Some good players in those England teams. Grant you Oz were totally dominant from 1989 to 2002/2003 a period where you produced a slew of great players. Don't kid yourself that there isn't much between these teams, England are farsuperior in every department - apart from tail batting. Your boys showed a lot of fight and got the rub of the green re ump decisions and still got beat. With the weather looking set fair can see Oz going down to a massive defeat in the series.

Show us some numbers to prove your point.  If they are far superior in every department, the numbers will back you up.  So where are they?

With the amount of stats recorded for everything involved in cricket, you must be able to come up with something.  Surely.
Not numbers from an hour, or a day, or a week.  Some real numbers.  Players averages?  Strike rates?  Wickets?  What?

Bowlers are better?
So they get more wickets, for less runs, and less balls?
Nope.
Batsmen far superior?
They average around 2.5 per player more.
Nope.
Ranking?
England have 115 ranking points.
Nope.

Hmmm..  Must be something somewhere.  Dig deep captain....  Sure you can find something.

here's one:

2-0

Here's another...

ICC rankings top 50 bats playing in this game..

5. Clarke
6. Cook
10. Trott
13. KP
16. Prior
17. Bell
43. Watson
45. Hughes
47. Root
48. Haddin

And Bowlers.

5. Siddle
6. Anderson
8. Swann
9. Broad
20. Pattinson
28. Harris
35. Bresnan
37. Watson

Dig deep captain....  Sure you can find something.



Tell you what BJT look at the figures for this test match - they're on cricinfo - those figures look like a powerful argument

Jul 21, 2013 -- 11:00AM, rob_dylan wrote:

Here's another...ICC rankings top 50 bats playing in this game..5. Clarke6. Cook10. Trott13. KP16. Prior17. Bell43. Watson45. Hughes47. Root48. Haddin

So how do they work?  I know for a fact they punish players that haven't played enough innings.  I also know for a fact that comparing Harris with Anderson for their last 19 innings, Harris comes out far superior, without acknowledging Anderson has played mainly against New Zealand in that time.

I also notice you put in Watson twice. Probably because 2 of our batsmen don't even qualify to be on the list because they haven't played enough. 

Also notice you have pointed out Siddle as a better bowler than Anderson, and Clarke better than your best Cook as well.

But really, without explaining what the numbers mean, you can't really use them to show them as being far superior.  I already said England are about 2.5 runs per player better with the bat, but our bowlers have yours covered easily, and backed it up.
You have provided rankings, which really don't mean anything.  I certainly don't know the formula they use, so I certainly don't know what the difference between ranked 1 and 500.  I bet you don't either.

two down

three down

What it means BJ, is you have one batsman and one bowler.

Yet we have 3 bowlers that get wickets faster and for less runs than your best. 

And lets be honest, we are playing the best team in history.....  rotflmfao...  Wonder what sort of a goose would start a thread like that.... 

BJT: give me stats. go on, stats. I demand stats. I defy you to give me stats. STATS!!

(PAUSE) not those. I don't like them, they don't count.

You cannot argue with an idiot viva.  For my sins I have got a little engaged, but perhaps no more.

I just like winding him up, tbh. it's just so moreish.

Yes cease now before he reminds everybody how England are a 25% chance of being the best sports team to ever play sport....   

totally agree, england are only a touch better than average atm.

yet they're still on the verge of running up one of the top 5 winning margins in post war tests.

>>As has been stated before, the decision was a close call and the
>>batsmen was given the benefit of the doubt, as he should be.

>total bollox, everyone could see he didn't get back

double bollox, yes many saw it as OUT... many also thought it was too
close to call.

>>nd England's bowling isn't anything special except for Anderson.
>>As I see it, your whole Ashes defence depends on Anderson staying healthy.

>Nonsense.  Anderson is superb, and had a great match.  But Broad and Swann are
>of course top notch too, look at their records over the last three years ffs.

Seems like it is perfectly OK to judge the Aussies on one or two performances,
but to do so for and English player and records of past performances are trotted out.

I'm only going on what I see, last day of first test, Aussies handling all other bowlers
with ease, only Anderson was able to make the breakthroughs needed.

Without him, this series is currently 1-1

Yes.  But it aint.  It is 2-0.  And you aint regaining the ashes this side of 2018.  Get used to it.