Feb 22, 2019 -- 1:56PM, detraveller wrote:

SL won't get the target imo.

Well, the market agrees that on average they won't but it's a small old total we're looking at.  There could be serious conniptions if they get to 25/0 again, as you imply.

Feb 22, 2019 -- 1:59PM, sewter lives again wrote:

what's amazing is the umpire missed the no ball in the first placehow many no balls are being missed nowadays?

I don't think they pick them off spinners at all. I remember Saqlain bowling England out with a whole slew of them, I think at Old Trafford with Shep umpiring in the early 2000s.

Feb 22, 2019 -- 2:15PM, detraveller wrote:

It is obviously a problem. Bowlers these days push the limits. As one found out(I think Ishant Sharma), he had been bowling no balls all day. And took two wickets which were overturned due to the no ball. So what's the point?Just make the third umpire check them with a camera. End of story.

I agree with the solution but it's not a problem for bowlers who don't bowl no balls, so it's still hardly that unreasonable as things are now.  The Sharma example, he really ought to have got the message after the first one.

Feb 22, 2019 -- 2:20PM, detraveller wrote:

The Sharma example, he really ought to have got the message after the first one.I have a vague memory of that and its possible it wasn't Sharma.But the point is, bowlers don't know that they are overstepping until they have to pay for it.After that, according to you, they need to adjust. But how do they know what adjustment they need to make? There is a difference between overstepping occasionally and overstepping all day. Bowlers need to know which one it is. Today they don't.

I don't disagree with what you're saying and as I say, I think the solution is the same as you do, I just don't really think the umpiring arrangement need to solve technical problems the bowlers are guilty of.  The bigger reason why I think it should be changed is that they get away with no balls that should be costing runs and I fundamentally feel that we should do the best we can to get all decisions, including relatively trivial ones, right, as long as it doesn't unduly spoil the spectacle.

Thing I love about these small chases is that the market has an absolute fit at small partnerships.  Sadly, I've not traded this to be able to take huge toll but at least I'm not just shelling out the 400 quid I was in hock yesterday.  Can't really understand why I've traded this so little - I've even been off work this week so have seen quite a bit of the game, between looking after the kids.

Feb 22, 2019 -- 2:26PM, Cardinal Scott wrote:

Lanka have drawn so much fire on this forum in the last 2 years....that they have a real chance of knocking off SA 2-0 in their own backyard is OUTLANDISH in the extreme.

Well it's not like we've just slagged them off for no reason either.  Fine, their home record was good, even against decent sides, until England of all teams turned them over 3-0 but they've been gash away from home.  You'd have expected SA to be a nightmare tour for them too, with their two best batsmen out, one injured, the other dropped by a board that's clearly manned by morons and cretins.  It's astonishing, really.  Back SA at absurdly short odds and walk the dog would have been a more than reasonable way to play this.

Hmm, red button equals no sound.  Should flip back for the toss, I suppose, as seem to have a grand and a half on it.