Author Topic: The cricket... (Read 257139 times)

andyoxon · « **Reply #275 on:** 06 December, 2012, 08:49:16 am »

Alastair Cook has beaten Tendulka's record to become youngest person to reach 7000 test runs.

bobb · « **Reply #276 on:** 06 December, 2012, 08:57:02 am »

Blimey! That's an impressive record to have

Deano · « **Reply #277 on:** 06 December, 2012, 09:16:14 am »

And now Cook's got his 23rd Test century, becoming England's most prolific century maker ever.

Good on Compton for reach his first Test fifty, too.

ferret · « **Reply #278 on:** 06 December, 2012, 12:07:56 pm »

yes he's even gone past Boiks

Deano · « **Reply #279 on:** 06 December, 2012, 12:13:12 pm »

On TMS, Boycott managed to crowbar in the fact that he scored 23 Test centuries, but one was for the RotW against South Africa, so it doesn't count. It obviously rankles a bit.

Shame I jinxed Compton - he was out an over or two after I posted that...

Von Broad · « **Reply #280 on:** 06 December, 2012, 06:42:58 pm »

Quote from: Deano on 06 December, 2012, 09:16:14 am

And now Cook's got his 23rd Test century, becoming England's most prolific century maker ever.

Amazing career to date really.
How much county cricket had he played before being selected for England? Can't have been that much.

bobb · « **Reply #281 on:** 06 December, 2012, 06:50:16 pm »

He made his first team debut for Essex in 2003. He first played for England (senior level) in 2006.

mattc · « **Reply #282 on:** 06 December, 2012, 08:03:49 pm »

Quote from: andyoxon on 06 December, 2012, 08:49:16 am

Alastair Cook has beaten Tendulka's record to become youngest person to reach 7000 test runs.

Stats are wonderful things.

IIRC Tendulkar beat him to 3000, 4000, 5000 etc ...

clarion · « **Reply #283 on:** 06 December, 2012, 08:06:53 pm »

I'm not normally bothered by the game, but Cook's achievements are worthy of celebration.

Canardly · « **Reply #284 on:** 06 December, 2012, 08:13:43 pm »

Wot he said ^^^^^^^

Wowbagger · « **Reply #285 on:** 07 December, 2012, 08:55:32 am »

And what an unfortunate way to get out! Run out on 190, in freak circumstances - the first time he's been run out in first class cricket.

He's lucky he never had to have Boycott as a partner.

ferret · « **Reply #286 on:** 08 December, 2012, 11:15:40 am »

I've only just seen the Cook run out, not a lot to say really, bad judgment, lapse of concentration, who knows, but one thing's for sure no one is going to be feeling as bad about as Cook does,
more up to date India go in to a 5th day but are only 30 odd runs in front, so our bowlers will return refreshed tomorrow and a win is on the cards
but it's when England get in to positions like this that we tend to get it all wrong, fingers crossed

Edit: I've just had a look at the 1st innings score card and if it weren't for Cooks 190 we would be in a more normal position for an England team, saying that though, the only real let down in the first 8 batsmen was bell with 5, also didn't KP get out playing a sweep shot ?

Wowbagger · « **Reply #287 on:** 08 December, 2012, 11:19:55 am »

Surely England will win within the hour unless it rains all day.

An impressive piece of cheating by the third umpire, it seems: the two umpires on the pitch decided to send a decision on Gambhir upstairs to see if the ball carried to the fielder for a catch, and it did. However, the 3rd umpire ruled not out on the grounds that Gambhir didn't hit the ball. That's not his job: the two umpires on the pitch had already decided that he had hit it. Fortunately Gambhir was out only a few balls later anyway.

ferret · « **Reply #288 on:** 08 December, 2012, 11:52:21 am »

I think umpires have a hard job, even more so in the modern game with all the technology and the attitude of the players.

Wowbagger · « **Reply #289 on:** 08 December, 2012, 01:32:33 pm »

Quote from: ferret on 08 December, 2012, 11:52:21 am

I think umpires have a hard job, even more so in the modern game with all the technology and the attitude of the players.

That's true, but he was specifically being asked whether the ball had carried, not on whether the batsman had hit it. From the Guardian over-by-over column:

Quote

Is this another wicket? Gambhir pushed at Swann, who went up for the LBW, but as he did so Trott took a low catch at slip and set off in celebration. The umpires went upstairs, presumably to check if it carried, which it did – but Gambhir did not hit it. The problem is that the third umpire cannot overrule on that; his only remit is to determine whether it carried. Gambhir has been not out. This is really controversial. Surely the third umpire can only rule on whether it carried? It appears the third umpire may have taken the law into his hands. Ultimately it's the right decision – Gambhir didn't hit it – although that's not the point. Unless we're missing something really obvious, which can't be ruled out, England have been stitched up there. You can't have the third umpire making it up as he goes along.

ferret · « **Reply #290 on:** 09 December, 2012, 06:31:10 pm »

well I didn't get up early enough to listen to any of the cricket, so how did it go ?

bobb · « **Reply #291 on:** 09 December, 2012, 06:37:47 pm »

Quote from: Wowbagger on 08 December, 2012, 01:32:33 pm

Quote from: ferret on 08 December, 2012, 11:52:21 am
I think umpires have a hard job, even more so in the modern game with all the technology and the attitude of the players.

That's true, but he was specifically being asked whether the ball had carried, not on whether the batsman had hit it. From the

That's ridiculous. So you could have a situation where an umpire talks to the third umpire and might say something like "Well, was he out?" and the third umpire, who has seen something else has to lie and say "No" even though he can see the batsman clearly was.

Might as well scrap it and go back to the old fashioned way of umpiring....

matthew · « **Reply #292 on:** 10 December, 2012, 12:29:24 pm »

Quote from: bobb on 09 December, 2012, 06:37:47 pm

Quote from: Wowbagger on 08 December, 2012, 01:32:33 pm
Quote from: ferret on 08 December, 2012, 11:52:21 am
I think umpires have a hard job, even more so in the modern game with all the technology and the attitude of the players.

That's true, but he was specifically being asked whether the ball had carried, not on whether the batsman had hit it. From the

That's ridiculous. So you could have a situation where an umpire talks to the third umpire and might say something like "Well, was he out?" and the third umpire, who has seen something else has to lie and say "No" even though he can see the batsman clearly was.

Might as well scrap it and go back to the old fashioned way of umpiring....

No when a catch is referred to the Third Umpire the laws also require the Third umpire to check if it was a legal delivery (no ball) and if it is a fair catch. Obviously it can't be a fair catch if the player didn't hit it.

There was subsequent discussion of this on TMS including Aggers siting an early example from before this clarification in a ODI of the player being given out caught off a no ball because the third umpire wasn't allowed to check that.

andyoxon · « **Reply #293 on:** 13 December, 2012, 10:44:22 am »

Anyone heard of Root?

Shouldn't speak too soon - but Prior is pretty good value isn't he...

Deano · « **Reply #294 on:** 14 December, 2012, 08:10:29 am »

I'd heard Root was an all-rounder...

India'll be batting by now (Monty was just coming in when I left the house). Anyone know if their score of 330-ish is any good on this pitch?

Jaded · « **Reply #295 on:** 14 December, 2012, 08:36:14 am »

Well, there was a wicket first over, but they're scoring at the moment. We need wickets a after tea.

Deano · « **Reply #296 on:** 14 December, 2012, 09:13:13 am »

Just catching up. Hurrah! Good to see Sehwag's out. He could have made a mockery of our total.

From 140-5 it's a pretty good total. Maybe Swann should bat at number 8 more often.

India to get a narrow lead and England to set them a naughty 150-200 to win in the fourth innings?

Basil · « **Reply #297 on:** 14 December, 2012, 10:17:49 am »

Tendulka. Gone!

Jaded · « **Reply #298 on:** 14 December, 2012, 10:27:08 am »

That's the top 4 gone!

Peter · « **Reply #299 on:** 14 December, 2012, 10:30:32 am »

And India still need 60 to avoid following on. That would be astonishing from a total of 330. This must be some pitch. What a game cricket is!