Cricket
Welcome to Live View – Take the tour to learn more
Start Tour
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
With so much to digest and after a great match at Trent Bridge, we go on to the 2nd Test Match at Lords starting this coming Thursday.
Another great match in prospect, I expect England will go with the same side, despite the fact that I think, Bressnan ought to replace Finn. I also expect Australia to go in with the same side as well.
Hopefully the cricket, will be slightly more fast moving, from a batting point of view and it usually is at the home of Cricket.
Another great match in prospect, I expect England will go with the same side, despite the fact that I think, Bressnan ought to replace Finn. I also expect Australia to go in with the same side as well.
Hopefully the cricket, will be slightly more fast moving, from a batting point of view and it usually is at the home of Cricket.
Show More
Mcgrath is not a cricket commentator. TMS wont be inviting him back.
Tiger Woods looking like he has had plenty of work done to his face?
get gilchrist in for the next one, imo. he was good value earlier.
individually a fair few aussie cricketers seem like guys you wouldn't mind having a beer with.
Commentators openly talking about cheating? Wow. Surprise....
yeah, england are cheating their way to a 400 run win.
Only missed by 8 inches. Still wondering if reviewing would give them another charity wicket. Guess they forgot to speak to the 3rd ump about their strategy before hand....
Bob willis do you still think khawaja is not a test batsman ??
Maybe the Aussies should try and tempt Nick Compton by some means?
How was that not given out? Missed the bat, but the ball was caught. Usually good enough?
Root more effective than Agar .......and Root is just a part time spinner
Indeed, what a player. Wish I had a bigger bank for this game.
BJT
18 Jul 13 07:45
What this doesn't take into account though, is England don't have a 5th bowler. Australias 5th bowler is Watson, whos stats are on a par with Broad, Englands 4th bowler. England need all bowlers to be fit and bowl out 5 days of cricket. Australia has more options.
Classic muppetry by the master
18 Jul 13 07:45
What this doesn't take into account though, is England don't have a 5th bowler. Australias 5th bowler is Watson, whos stats are on a par with Broad, Englands 4th bowler. England need all bowlers to be fit and bowl out 5 days of cricket. Australia has more options.
Classic muppetry by the master
Incredibly England were out to 1.15 again before the 4th Wicket and not only was the draw shortening but Australia were too as Traders obviously felt the partnership with Clarke could get to 600!!
I reckon by the time we get to the end of game 5 we could be looking at one of the all time epic betfair seethes here.
Jul 21, 2013 -- 9:48AM, lustrumm wrote:
Incredibly England were out to 1.15 again before the 4th Wicket and not only was the draw shortening but Australia were too as Traders obviously felt the partnership with Clarke could get to 600!!
Just because it didn't doesn't mean it could have.....
you keep fighting the good fight BJT. I just hope for your own sake it is not your own money involved
this is going to go down well with our australian friend...
Jul 21, 2013 -- 10:05AM, lustrumm wrote:
you keep fighting the good fight BJT. I just hope for your own sake it is not your own money involved
Why the fcuk would I waste my time using somebody elses money? Would rather make me money than somebody else.
Sometimes you get some matches with dodgy decisions. But this test match will go down in history as the worst refereed game in any sport, ever.
How as that overturned - was it audio? I'm watching golf
3rd ump heard a sound, confirmed by snicko. also said he saw a deflection, which was far less obvious imo. though the rotation of the ball seemed to change slightly to me.
slightly dubious but not a stinker.
slightly dubious but not a stinker.
Don't think it has changed the ultimate result as this was such a one sided match, but the DRS system has looked very suspect every day of the series so far. There was a clear hot spot on Agar's pad there but his bat never went near the pad.
that was surely not out? what the point of DRS when it gets so many wrong?
not gonna change the result but really
not gonna change the result but really
I think the umps get muddled with opinion and beyond the question of doubt
hard to explain the snicko if he didn't hit it.
in which case DRS converted a wrong decision into a right one, again.
in which case DRS converted a wrong decision into a right one, again.
It was good decision . Agar had smacked a few boundaries in the over prior and was disrepecting the English bowlers. He had to go.
It appears very possible for the bat to nick the ball without it showing up on hot spot.
anybody who's saying that wasn't out, how do you explain the spike on snicko?
A very fine graze of the bat and it will not come up on hotspot but will show on snicko. Good decision imo
Jul 21, 2013 -- 10:22AM, superam wrote:
What goes around Ashton
Are we referring to the wicket of Broad that was given not out handing England the first test? Or something different?
But this test match will go down in history as the worst refereed game in any sport, ever.
>>>No it won't, I bet your long-suffering mrs has to find your dummy, not your brat's.
>>>No it won't, I bet your long-suffering mrs has to find your dummy, not your brat's.
Dont despair BJT ,when England have secured the ashes after the next test the dodgy decisions will be more balanced out for the final two tests. Cant say fairer than that.
The 3rd umpire can't use snicko for his decision making. It probably was out, but on field ruling was not out. With no hotspot the 3rd umpire was just guessing when he overturned which is absurd.
Throughout the series technology has been let down by 3rd umpire incomptence or 3rd umpires not understanding their role.
Throughout the series technology has been let down by 3rd umpire incomptence or 3rd umpires not understanding their role.
Even though it was likely out, that wasn't enough evidence to overturn the on field decision imv. It should be beyond reasonable doubt. So if it was given out it should have stayed out and not out also left alone.
Starting to pine for the old days before technology as the 3rd umpires simply aren't up to using it consistently.
The 3rd umpire can't use snicko for his decision making. It probably was out, but on field ruling was not out. With no hotspot the 3rd umpire was just guessing when he overturned which is absurd.
--------
that's not the point,java. the 3rd ump said he could clearly hear a sound as well as see a deflection. snicko independently verifies that there was a sound, whether he could use it or not.
anyone saying that was not out has to explain what that spike was, imo.
--------
that's not the point,java. the 3rd ump said he could clearly hear a sound as well as see a deflection. snicko independently verifies that there was a sound, whether he could use it or not.
anyone saying that was not out has to explain what that spike was, imo.
Are we referring to the wicket of Broad that was given not out handing England the first test? Or something different?
>>>No Agar's clear stumping when he was on about 8.
>>>No Agar's clear stumping when he was on about 8.
I agree it was out, but the 3rd umpire was wrong to overturn if that makes sense. He didn't have enough evidence. The sound can be bat on ground, bat on pad etc and there wasn't enough evidence of deviation to the naked eye to overturn.
The fact that he guessed the right decision is beside the point.
The fact that he guessed the right decision is beside the point.
He has gone through everything, not seen anything, then listened to audio and claimed he saw a deflection. There was no deflection to see. He is making it up as he goes along. He did the same with another decision.
He is making a mockery of cricket. If this game was closer, we would have hundreds of thousands of dollars going on those decisions. If it affected the market, people would be looking at the 100% chance of it remaining not out, and betting accordingly, to then witness their money disappear because some incompetent fcuk making siht up?
How in hell he is in charge is beyond me.
Cost us the first test, and gave us zero chance in this one. Between Smith, Rogers, Agar, this was just a waste of time even turning up. In fact, I think I keep my money in my pocket while this farce is allowed to continue.
He is making a mockery of cricket. If this game was closer, we would have hundreds of thousands of dollars going on those decisions. If it affected the market, people would be looking at the 100% chance of it remaining not out, and betting accordingly, to then witness their money disappear because some incompetent fcuk making siht up?
How in hell he is in charge is beyond me.
Cost us the first test, and gave us zero chance in this one. Between Smith, Rogers, Agar, this was just a waste of time even turning up. In fact, I think I keep my money in my pocket while this farce is allowed to continue.
but what he was saying was he could clearly hear a sound and see a deflection. so, as far as he was concerned, he wasn't guessing. and snicko run next to the film suggests he was right.
people are using this decision to suggest DRS should be scrapped. whereas what seems most likely is it turned a wrong difficult call into a right one.
it's also done aus a favour, ironically. because the last thing they wanted was agar getting another 50 and forcing his way into the next test. his bowling's not good enough,and it would have made no difference to the match.
people are using this decision to suggest DRS should be scrapped. whereas what seems most likely is it turned a wrong difficult call into a right one.
it's also done aus a favour, ironically. because the last thing they wanted was agar getting another 50 and forcing his way into the next test. his bowling's not good enough,and it would have made no difference to the match.
We'll have to agree to disagree Viva. For me there wasn't enough evidence to overturn an on field ruling either way. If Agar was given out it should have stood, if given not out it also should have stood.
It's certain there was no "clear" deflection that the 3rd umpire was talking about.
It's certain there was no "clear" deflection that the 3rd umpire was talking about.
Surely he controlled that? Come on umpires, where is the consistancy?
Exactly, if he has hit it, it was only the tiniest of feathers. Overturned decisions shouldn't be debatable.
fair enough java.
personally, I'm very in favour of DRS. i can think of some tweaks (include snicko, define "clearly" more, er, clearly), but the truth is we live in an age of that technology. if the game doesn't use it, the tv companies still will, and we'll see more match-changing errors.
personally, I'm very in favour of DRS. i can think of some tweaks (include snicko, define "clearly" more, er, clearly), but the truth is we live in an age of that technology. if the game doesn't use it, the tv companies still will, and we'll see more match-changing errors.
If the Australians could learn to hit the ball in the centre of the bat then alot of these controversies could be avoided imo
air enough java.
personally, I'm very in favour of DRS. i can think of some tweaks (include snicko, define "clearly" more, er, clearly), but the truth is we live in an age of that technology. if the game doesn't use it, the tv companies still will, and we'll see more match-changing errors
>>>Exactly.
personally, I'm very in favour of DRS. i can think of some tweaks (include snicko, define "clearly" more, er, clearly), but the truth is we live in an age of that technology. if the game doesn't use it, the tv companies still will, and we'll see more match-changing errors
>>>Exactly.
totally
on field decisions should stand unless there is indisputable evidence to overturn
and umpires should be making better on field calls
not a fan of DRS myself really
on field decisions should stand unless there is indisputable evidence to overturn
and umpires should be making better on field calls
not a fan of DRS myself really
There's a checklist for lbws which works well, maybe there should be something similar for other modes of dismissal. Such as to overturn a not out nick there needs to be an audible sound, hot spot and a deflection. Everyone would know where they stand, less down to opinion.
The only adaptation I'd make is that you get your review back if it's only umpire's call that saves.
Extra half hour tonight? Be good to wrap things up and pick up the winnings... What price Eng next test - 1.7 or something? See some storms predicted for later in the week.
Yeah sorry, meant more as in 'this sunshine isn't going to last forever'!
BJT 21 Jul 13 16:42
Cost us the first test, and gave us zero chance in this one.
You mean the first test that allowed Agar to stay in and get an extra 90 runs and also gave Trott out for a duck when he clearly wasn't out. Yes that really cost you.
And the thing that's cost you in this test is piss poor batting.
Cost us the first test, and gave us zero chance in this one.
You mean the first test that allowed Agar to stay in and get an extra 90 runs and also gave Trott out for a duck when he clearly wasn't out. Yes that really cost you.
And the thing that's cost you in this test is piss poor batting.
pitch dug up by nutters overnight, match abandoned, bets void, forum seething breaks the internet NAP
I'll tell you - these two are really good batsmen - especially Pattinson - would be the story of the century if they managed to hold out tomorrow.
wow, dodged a bullet there on test match end market. Think I owe Swanny a drink 
Glad we finished it tonight. Agree with Vaughan, Bell mom for me.
dodged a bullet myself,, had a stack of dosh on kadweja being top score, refused to lay some off on the tail....but pattinson had me sweating for a bit
Post Your Reply
Please login to post a reply.
Wonder
Instance ID: 13539