|
By:
WD, get me a couple from the Oval
![]() |
|
By:
tom on a charm offensive
|
|
By:
you pay a £1 deposit for those glasses to stop people making snakes
|
|
By:
I'd gladly pay £1 for one of them
|
|
By:
need a SIXPAD advert,means beertime
|
|
By:
![]() |
|
By:
Do 15 mins on the x trainer, earn yourself a few
![]() |
|
By:
That's one hell of a short draw price. I was hoping to come in green on draw but ended up getting more lays than backs matched so have a reasonable but not exciting position. Draw under 4 just has to be a lay doesn't it? Am going to look for 3.5 at a decent amount, I think. These remain good attacks and bad batting sides, relatively speaking.
|
|
By:
|
|
By:
agree FS
|
|
By:
What to do as a first move - lay England or the draw ?
|
|
By:
Hales convinced
|
|
By:
not out from that angle
|
|
By:
Bet 365 has me limited to the very specific stake of £24 on England runs on this test. I think they've spotted that I'm a dirty arbitrage merchant. I made a small amount off arbing on Indian runs yesterday and won on 365, lost on Betfair. I think I'll be lucky to be allowed to bet a tenner with them on anything soon enough. Wonder whether my wife wants a 365 account...
|
|
By:
ups given it,need another angle
|
|
By:
looks like he's caught it
|
|
By:
if theres only one angle, he cant overturn it can he?
|
|
By:
all the cameras in the ground and just 1 angle omfg
|
|
By:
not sure tom,i think the ump decision stands
|
|
By:
lol how that out?
|
|
By:
pretty poor non use of technology
right decision from what's available imo |
|
By:
umpires decision,get on with it
|
|
By:
tomtimtum
11 Aug 16 11:15 WD, get me a couple from the Oval Love Plastic glasses? I didn't see the screen when you were talking |
|
By:
looks like he scooped that up off the grass
|
|
By:
Surprised that is the only camera angle. Would have expected a camera square of the wicket.
|
|
By:
England price barely moved, you were right Terry
![]() |
|
By:
What is that ump looking at - it clearly bounces and goes through his hands?
|
|
By:
makes a change |
|
By:
he wasn't in a position to give him out
unsatisfactory replay was clear as mud |
|
By:
another shocking decision from the umps. The three unwise men
|
|
By:
clearly?
|
|
By:
Surely there should have been better camera angles than that
|
|
By:
not the fault of the third umpire, he couldnt overturn it on what he had.
|
|
By:
no way they onfield umps could be certain he caught that. hard to blame the 3rd ump. he was stuffed by the lack of clear pics
|
|
By:
you can't blame the 3rd ump for telling the on-field umpires to uphold the soft decision. that was the right thing to do.
the problem is that the soft decision was the wrong one: you have to be sure beyond reasonable doubt that it carried and i don't see how either of the on-field umpires could be. |
|
By:
Looked like the ball was touching the ground, at the same time it reached the fielders hands, benefit of the doubt goes to the batsmen, there was no way the umpire could tell that the ball definatly did carry.
|
|
By:
sky will probably have it blown up in ten minutes and tell us but that aint no good.
agreed a bit poor the lack of angles. |
|
By:
I'm blaming the onfield umpire for giving him out, in the first place.
|
|
By:
This soft signal is a load of bollox
|
|
By:
Yes if there is any doubt surely the Batsman gets benefit of doubt
|