Author Topic: The cricket... (Read 256489 times)

Greenbank · « **Reply #500 on:** 11 July, 2013, 03:05:38 pm »

Quote from: mattc on 11 July, 2013, 03:00:45 pm

Roll out your favourite cliches:
need one good partnership, early wickets important, bowl in the right areas ... yada yada ...

"Be there at the end of the day."

mcshroom · « **Reply #501 on:** 11 July, 2013, 03:42:39 pm »

What was this stumping chance the commentators were mumbling about earlier?

jogler · « **Reply #502 on:** 11 July, 2013, 04:06:29 pm »

ftfy'all

Illegal Combat Ant · « **Reply #503 on:** 11 July, 2013, 04:25:49 pm »

Quote from: mcshroom on 11 July, 2013, 03:42:39 pm

What was this stumping chance the commentators were mumbling about earlier?

Agar was out stumped on 6. Not a stumping chance, stumped.

andyoxon · « **Reply #504 on:** 11 July, 2013, 07:04:18 pm »

"Highest score by a number 11 in Test history", quite a record by Agar.

bobb · « **Reply #505 on:** 11 July, 2013, 07:25:25 pm »

A remarkable day.

I'm really not keen on all this referral nonsense...

Deano · « **Reply #506 on:** 11 July, 2013, 07:29:24 pm »

Just watching the highlights. They put him in at number 11?! Steve Smith must be worried for his spot (more so than usual, I mean).

Shades of Tino Best last year. I really wanted him to get his century too. Mind you, Agar looked out stumped on six.

bobb · « **Reply #507 on:** 12 July, 2013, 05:17:00 pm »

That's more like it. Keep nudging that total up run by run...

andyoxon · « **Reply #508 on:** 12 July, 2013, 05:57:30 pm »

Yes - stay in 'til close, and push a 300 lead tomorrow am, would be good.

bobb · « **Reply #509 on:** 12 July, 2013, 05:59:30 pm »

And always wait for the umpire's decision before walking

mattc · « **Reply #510 on:** 12 July, 2013, 06:16:29 pm »

Quote from: bobb on 11 July, 2013, 07:25:25 pm

I'm really not keen on all this referral nonsense...

Me neither.

But it's starting to grow on me ...

clifftaylor · « **Reply #511 on:** 12 July, 2013, 06:27:07 pm »

For me, one of the pleasures of cricket is that in some ways it can be remarkably subtle, and in others, remarkably simple. One of the simplicities is that the umpire decides when people are out (referals notwithstanding).

andyoxon · « **Reply #512 on:** 12 July, 2013, 06:29:22 pm »

Quote from: bobb on 12 July, 2013, 05:59:30 pm

And always wait for the umpire's decision before walking

Umpire's decision is final...

Must watch the highlights.

mattc · « **Reply #513 on:** 12 July, 2013, 07:25:02 pm »

Quote from: clifftaylor on 12 July, 2013, 06:27:07 pm

For me, one of the pleasures of cricket is that in some ways it can be remarkably subtle, and in others, remarkably simple. One of the simplicities is that the umpire decides when people are out (referals notwithstanding).

Now, this isn't my sport, but ... I'm pretty sure a batsman can choose to walk, and the ump doesn't have to do a thing. This can save the official any angst with those decisions where the batsman is best positioned to know (e.g. will always know if he did nick a ball).

The umpire could well believe it was Not Out, but would (i think) defer to the batsman's view in such a situation.

But in most situations, you are spot-on.

bobb · « **Reply #514 on:** 12 July, 2013, 07:31:43 pm »

I would normally always say a batsman should walk if he believed he has nicked it, but seeing as more and more decisions are being taken away from the umpires now, I don't see how any decisions can be left to the batsmen!

If Broad had walked, there would have been just as many people (in the press, twatter etc) saying he should have waited for the umpire's decision as there would be praising him for shoving his bat under his arm and trudging purposefully back to the pavillion with his head held high.

A very similar thing happened to Adam Gilchrest in Australia 10+ years ago against the West Indies. Only he walked. The press went mental at him for not waiting for the umpire....

Deano · « **Reply #515 on:** 12 July, 2013, 07:35:59 pm »

Gilchrist made a point of walking - which made him no friends among the Aussies.

Deano · « **Reply #516 on:** 12 July, 2013, 07:51:51 pm »

Whoah, just saw the Broad appeal. I'm amazed he wasn't given out!

Basil · « **Reply #517 on:** 12 July, 2013, 07:56:30 pm »

I've walked.
As I passed the umpire he said, "Oh, are you sure?"

Oops

Luckily we won the match so I didn't get to be too unpopular with the chaps.

Greenbank · « **Reply #518 on:** 12 July, 2013, 08:05:53 pm »

There will be many saying that the Broad incident "evens out" the Agar stumping that wasn't given.

Quote from: bobb on 12 July, 2013, 07:31:43 pm

I would normally always say a batsman should walk if he believed he has nicked it, but seeing as more and more decisions are being taken away from the umpires now, I don't see how any decisions can be left to the batsmen!

If Broad had walked, there would have been just as many people (in the press, twatter etc) saying he should have waited for the umpire's decision as there would be praising him for shoving his bat under his arm and trudging purposefully back to the pavillion with his head held high.

True, but being pilloried for sticking to the "Spirit of Cricket" (and walking) is better (in my opinion) than being pilloried for sticking to the "Laws of cricket" (and waiting to be given out).

Deano · « **Reply #519 on:** 12 July, 2013, 08:10:02 pm »

I don't think Broad's not-walking or Trott's dodgy dismissal will prove significant in the match. I reckon England will set a target too tough for the Aussies, especially with Swann bowling.

I do hope Ian Bell gets to a century. Ian Bell deserves it. /kiss of death.

mattc · « **Reply #520 on:** 12 July, 2013, 08:10:34 pm »

Quote from: Greenbank on 12 July, 2013, 08:05:53 pm

There will be many saying that the Broad incident "evens out" the Agar stumping that wasn't given.

If he doesn't score >97 can we still claim the moral high ground?!?

andyoxon · « **Reply #521 on:** 12 July, 2013, 08:34:11 pm »

Quote from: Deano on 12 July, 2013, 07:51:51 pm

Whoah, just saw the Broad appeal. I'm amazed he wasn't given out!

Me too. Broad put the umpire in a difficult position, because the umpire shouldn't have missed that one - but he clearly did. I think the point of Aus using up their reviews (in this age of tech aided decisions) rather speculatively is also valid - they should have kept one up their sleeve.

Peter · « **Reply #522 on:** 12 July, 2013, 08:36:27 pm »

Quote from: bobb on 12 July, 2013, 07:31:43 pm

I would normally always say a batsman should walk if he believed he has nicked it, but seeing as more and more decisions are being taken away from the umpires now, I don't see how any decisions can be left to the batsmen!

If Broad had walked, there would have been just as many people (in the press, twatter etc) saying he should have waited for the umpire's decision as there would be praising him for shoving his bat under his arm and trudging purposefully back to the pavillion with his head held high.

A very similar thing happened to Adam Gilchrest in Australia 10+ years ago against the West Indies. Only he walked. The press went mental at him for not waiting for the umpire....

The point being that the ones criticising him would be wrong and those praising him right. I would normally have said that such considerations wouldn't count against Australia - then you reminded me of the Gilchrist incident! (Gilchrist was also right).

I think the umpire is there to decide when no-one else knows. I don't think his job description includes being the sole arbiter of a dismissal - or maybe it does?

clifftaylor · « **Reply #523 on:** 12 July, 2013, 08:52:58 pm »

Quote from: andyoxon on 12 July, 2013, 08:34:11 pm

Me too. Broad put the umpire in a difficult position

No, Broad didn't put the umpire anywhere - the umpire did that by missing an easy decision. And the Aussies fucked up by mis-using their reviews.

clifftaylor · « **Reply #524 on:** 12 July, 2013, 08:55:14 pm »

Quote from: Peter on 12 July, 2013, 08:36:27 pm

I don't think his job description includes being the sole arbiter of a dismissal - or maybe it does?

That's exactly his job description