2nd Test: West Indies vs. Australia [Archive]

Nige_Bix

20 Apr 2003, 01:10

After giving 2 others not out for the same thing - he must have gotten sick of shaking his head! Any umpire who keeps giving these out is incompetent - surely he can tell from where he is standing that ball was well outside the line. Far too many of these decisions have been given in the past 12 months - affecting all sides btw - and ODI's as well.

I have umpired a little bit and to me it was one of the easiest decsions to give not out to!!

Oh No -as I'm typing - Hayden gets exactly the same decision!! - What an imbecile! He must want to go home early! - could this be his last test on the elite panel! Maybe they want to even up on the rough decisions that the Windies got in the last test!!

Ian Bishop the commentator mentioned the embarrassment of the decisions!

Nige_Bix

20 Apr 2003, 01:24

Well Lehmann now has a chance to do something under pressure - if he stuffs here it might well be his last chance. Mind you being a lefthander he is in the running for a DeSilva special!!

red+black

20 Apr 2003, 01:27

yes, shocker is one of the worst umpires. cricket umpires are right up there with soccer referees. what a joke. it's about time these morons were held accountable for their poor decisions. otherwise we have to pick 11 right handers.

honestly, SOMETHING HAS TO BE DONE RIGHT NOW. either the rule is changed so that the ball is allowed to pitch outside leg stump, or lefties are to be never given out to right arm pace bowlers, or we always go to video replays for LBW, or they draw lines down the pitch. SOMETHING HAS TO BE DONE. WE CANNOT RELY ON INCOMPETENT UMPIRES TO IMPROVE THEIR PERFORMANCES.

I pity Lehmann and Gilchrist :mad:

Black Thunder

20 Apr 2003, 03:10

Asanka de Silva is a shocker - he has no idea to umpire.

LBW is suprisngly not that hard of decision to give, as someone mentioned above.

It really is quite easy to tell, especiallt after you've played a fair amount of cricket on turf pitches (the reason why umpires hwo have played are better) to give lbw decisions - you kno when it will hit hte stumps.

kretchy

20 Apr 2003, 08:55

3/391 at stumps

Lehmann 160 - Terrific to see the great man getting his maiden century.
Ponting 146*
Partnership of 315 between Lehmann and Ponting nearly 400 in a day sensational effort.

Generalissimo

20 Apr 2003, 09:56

Originally posted by kretchy
Lehmann 160 - Terrific to see the great man getting his maiden century.

I predicted this. Now bring on the innings victory.

Unwritten_Law

20 Apr 2003, 11:02

Where did they find the umpire? Kanga Cricket. They were shockers, he must of wanted to give the middle order a go.

Another great innings by Ponting. Three hundreds and a 40 odd not out in his last four innings. Bring on the captaincy.

Good on Boof :) Maybe it will keep the knockers away for another test.

The Windies would look at the score board and then glance at the Aussie dressing room see Gilchrist and think oh s*it.

JUBJUB

20 Apr 2003, 11:35

Originally posted by Black Thunder
Asanka de Silva is a shocker - he has no idea to umpire.

Peter Roebuck gave De Silva a huge blast.De Silva is making Rusty Tiffen look good.

Bomber Spirit

20 Apr 2003, 12:52

Ellewellekankange Asoka de Silva - an umpire who has no idea.:p

But well done to Lehmann & Ponting. They were sensational.

dr nick

20 Apr 2003, 13:04

i wouldnt be too reluctant to wager that if i was umpiring i would do a far better job than some of the hacks we have doing the rounds at the moment.

its always a worry when you constantly are looking at lbw shouts on the tv and you yourself know it is not out yet the umpire invariably gets it wrong MORE OFTEN THAN NOT FFS.

people may say that it is hard without the assistance of replays. this is a croc. i am always getting more decisions right from the tv cameras which are at much worse angles than the umpires, and i would like to think when i occasionally umpire i get them right too. i reckon even guys like the slips, wicketkeeper, batsmen and bowler would have known those LBW's were not out, yet we have guys like Asoka de W@nka getting gig after gig despite horrid performances every bloody time.

red+black

20 Apr 2003, 13:32

you should see over at rec.sport.cricket. any criticism of Asoka (the shocker) de silva is countered by claims of racism. yep, he's crap cos he's black. that's what everyone has been saying. :rolleyes:

Fall Out Boy

20 Apr 2003, 13:37

Anyone know why Shiv Chanderpaul pulled out?

The Windies named three different teams within 30 minutes of the game, the final squad was only decided 10 minutes before the first ball was bowled.

Wouldn't happen with any other team in the world.

scmods

20 Apr 2003, 14:56

Originally posted by red+black
you should see over at rec.sport.cricket. any criticism of Asoka (the shocker) de silva is countered by claims of racism.
On rec.sport.cricket any comment at all is usually countered by claims of racism.

dr nick

20 Apr 2003, 15:10

Originally posted by red+black
you should see over at rec.sport.cricket. any criticism of Asoka (the shocker) de silva is countered by claims of racism. yep, he's crap cos he's black. that's what everyone has been saying. :rolleyes:

gotta love the race card. never mind being critical of Hair or Tiffen, but as soon as a Sri Lankan is involved, look out. you are suddenly a racist bigot.

Bomber Spirit

20 Apr 2003, 16:59

Originally posted by red+black
you should see over at rec.sport.cricket. any criticism of Asoka (the shocker) de silva is countered by claims of racism. yep, he's crap cos he's black. that's what everyone has been saying. :rolleyes: Ellewellekankanange is Sri Lankan and played with Arjuna Ranatunga. So of course, any criticism has to be racist - it's the same with Murali, international diplomacy over-rides the laws of cricket.:rolleyes: :rolleyes:

JUBJUB

20 Apr 2003, 17:07

JUBJUB

20 Apr 2003, 17:08

Originally posted by phatandphreaky
Anyone know why Shiv Chanderpaul pulled out?

It was mentioned that he practiced all week,then suddenly withdrew.

red+black

20 Apr 2003, 17:42

Originally posted by JUBJUB
Michael Holding gave him a bagging & he's black.Is he racist ?
naah, i think it's like comparing Tarantino and Dre using the word ******

Nige_Bix

20 Apr 2003, 21:52

Originally posted by JUBJUB
Michael Holding gave him a bagging & he's black.Is he racist ?

Yes - and so did Ian Bishop! The Windies got some real ruffies in Test - maybe AdS was trying to even the score.

Russell Tiffin is no better than AdS - they are both crap!

dr nick

20 Apr 2003, 22:02

Originally posted by JUBJUB
It was mentioned that he practiced all week,then suddenly withdrew.

Chanderpaul is weak. people like him can't front up to the challenge the Australian team presents. he is like Graham Thorpe. gets a slight injury to his toe or something and whammo, thats the end of the series for them. happens every time with those two.

i was actually surprised to see him play in the first test. i thought he could have done better to conjure up a mystery illness, infection or family troubles.

Kenny_01

20 Apr 2003, 22:23

Interesting first day... we completely dominated. Hope Ponting and Gilly can destroy them today.

Black Thunder

21 Apr 2003, 01:39

3/483 now

Gillly just notched up his half century from 60 balls and his not even timing the ball all that well :eek:

As long as we don't throw it away trying to belt the **** out of the ball like we did in the first test we'll get 700 here.

Steve Waugh will be fired up to get a big score.

This is just carnage.

Better off putting Eastern Suburbs 4th Grade out there against the Aussies. Vasbert Drakes wasn't bowling much quicker than myself or my opening bowler partner so we couldn't do any worse.

Black Thunder

21 Apr 2003, 03:20

3/542 and complete carnage,

but just as I speak Ponting has been run out very strangely. Or was it stumped.

Well its 4/542

Ponting got a doublecentury.

replay now. Dont know what he was doing.

ball went down leg side, a second after the keeper took it Ponting started to run thinking the ball had beaten the keeper. :confused:

anyway, well were 4/542 and the Widneis have got 2 wickets from shocking lbw decisions and a run out from a shocking misdugement.

Black Thunder

21 Apr 2003, 03:21

also Brad Hogg has come out at 6.

The Floodbuster

21 Apr 2003, 04:21

Dizzy strikes.

West Indies 1-4. Devon Smith caught behind.

Gillespie 1-0 off one over

The Floodbuster

21 Apr 2003, 04:26

I'm disappointed Steve Waugh declared.
Another 10 days to see Australia Bat again.
We seemed to build up all the hype for a new record and we declare, this happens often and all that happens is we get to see another 3 day match that could of had Australia bat for another half a day and make 750 runs.
Another great batting display and Lehmann looks right at Number 4.

EagleBlue

21 Apr 2003, 08:36

Originally posted by JUBJUB
It was mentioned that he practiced all week,then suddenly withdrew.

Maybe he got the Graham Thorp disease

EagleBlue

21 Apr 2003, 08:40

Originally posted by Black Thunder

but just as I speak Ponting has been run out very strangely. Or was it stumped.

Well its 4/542

Ponting got a doublecentury.

replay now. Dont know what he was doing.

ball went down leg side, a second after the keeper took it Ponting started to run thinking the ball had beaten the keeper. :confused:

did you see the umpire. It apeared as though he wasnt even looking at the stumping. More guess work by our Sri Lankan mate although at least this one WAS out

Bomber Spirit

21 Apr 2003, 09:39

Originally posted by Black Thunder
Better off putting Eastern Suburbs 4th Grade out there against the Aussies. Vasbert Drakes wasn't bowling much quicker than myself or my opening bowler partner so we couldn't do any worse. Doesn't Viv Richards' son play for them?

Wicked Lester

21 Apr 2003, 10:26

Why didn't Steve Waugh bat himself?

If he was injured then perhaps he shouldn't have played in thius test anyway.

I find this quite curious. I think the pressure is on him to actually prove to the selectors he's still capable of making runs in live test matches (which he hasn't done for quite some time).

Perhaps he's been told this is his last series so he's now going out of his way to blood others.

If however he still harbours ambititions of batting on for another year or so I just think it was a very odd decision as if we only bat once this test and win he will have contributed 25 runs in total toward Australia retaining the FW trophy whic for a guy with the selectors looking very closely at him is perhaps not enough.

EagleBlue

21 Apr 2003, 10:28

Originally posted by Wicked Lester
Why didn't Steve Waugh bat himself?

If he was injured then perhaps he shouldn't have played in thius test anyway.

I find this quite curious. I think the pressure is on him to actually prove to the selectors he's still capable of making runs in live test matches (which he hasn't done for quite some time).

Perhaps he's been told this is his last series so he's now going out of his way to blood others.

If however he still harbours ambititions of batting on for another year or so I just think it was a very odd decision as if we only bat once this test and win he will have contributed 25 runs in total toward Australia retaining the FW trophy whic for a guy with the selectors looking very closely at him is perhaps not enough.

Maybe he wanted Brad Hogg to improve on his batting average of 2.75. Personally I would liked to have seen Lee or Bichel come in and slap it around for a bit

dr nick

21 Apr 2003, 10:50

Originally posted by EagleBlue
Maybe he wanted Brad Hogg to improve on his batting average of 2.75. Personally I would liked to have seen Lee or Bichel come in and slap it around for a bit

yep, amazingly it seems to be the same people claiming he is selfish for not giving others a go, yet when he puts some slappers in there to get quick runs before a declaration, he is also critisized that he shouldnt even be playing in the test if he isnt fit.

ScouseCat

21 Apr 2003, 12:45

STUMPS - DAY 2:

Australia: 4 for 576 declared
Ponting 206
Lehmann 160
Gilchrist 101 not out

West Indies: 3 for 186
Lara 91
Ganga 69 not out

Gillespie, Lee and Hogg have one wicket each.

Fall Out Boy

21 Apr 2003, 16:14

Wicked Lester

21 Apr 2003, 16:35

Originally posted by nicko18
yep, amazingly it seems to be the same people claiming he is selfish for not giving others a go, yet when he puts some slappers in there to get quick runs before a declaration, he is also critisized that he shouldnt even be playing in the test if he isnt fit.

Nicko

I think you missed my point - I wasn't commenting on whether he was being selfish or otherwise.

My observation was that for a guy who knows the selectors are looking very closey at his long term batting form, it was an odd decision not to bat and demonstrate his hunger. If we win this match we have retained the Frank Worrel TRophy. Tugga stands vulnerbale over his past 4-5 series to the accusation that his runs have come in 'dead' test matches - last couple of matches of a series that we've already won. When a long term player ceases to make his runs in live matches it is often used by selectors to justify their final and difficult decision. Exactly what happened to Jones and Boon.

I can't recall the last time Tugga made big runs in a live match - 2001? (happy to be proven wrong).

Its for that reason I thought his decision not to come in at 5 (or even 4) very strange. The slectors are looking for a reason to hand things over to the next generation. The "Lehmann hasn't proven himself" argument for no further changes has now been put to bed - at least temporarily. In Hayden, Langer, Ponting, Martyn, Lehmann and Gilchrist , Australia has an experienced, professional and hard nosed line up. Love is a good reserve. The slelctors are itching to select Clark.

I honestly believe Tugga needed to show he's still hungry for runs.

Ronnie Irani

21 Apr 2003, 20:34

dr nick

21 Apr 2003, 23:38

Irani, the joke wore thin long ago.

catattack

22 Apr 2003, 02:10

When will people finally wake up to the fact that in the abscence of Glenn Mcgrath and Shane Warne Jason Gillespie is Australia's best bowler by an absolute mile. So often he has bowled as well as Mcgrath without reward and for him to remain fit and end up the leading wicket taker of the series would be just reward. Jason Gillespie is the most under rated bowler in Australia as he has the pace of Lee and the control of Mcgrath and continues to bowl without luck.

red+black

22 Apr 2003, 10:35

Originally posted by phatandphreaky
If you believe he moved down the order to be unselfish then i guess you also believe in the Easter Bunny.

Your rationale could explain away him sending Hogg in before himself, but Gilly? He certainly didn't send Gilly in "to get quick runs before a declaration".

Let's face it, he either just didn't want to bat, or the finger isn't ready (which is contrary to what he has said).

a ridiculous comment. he had had the pads on for most of the first day, and then decided to have a rest and get gilly to pad up. When Boof went out, Gilly went in cos he was padded up. This is a plausible tactic that I think is far too often under utilised.

As to why he didn't bat once Punter went out, I agree, that was odd, and didn't look good. But Hogg needed the bat. We know that Bichel and Lee can hit the ball, we need Hogg though to contribute more with the bat, so it was a good opportunity to give him a hit.

I was disappointed that we declared so early. I'm not ever expecting us to score 900, but will we ever bat for two days? The argument could be to spare the bowlers, but we could drop two bowlers from this test for the 3rd test (bringing in Pidge and a batsman), so I think they could have bowled for 3 days. With the spinners bowling in tandem, I don't think we would have been overworking our pace attack.

ScouseCat

22 Apr 2003, 10:37

STUMPS - DAY 3:

Australia: 4 for 576 declared
Ponting 206
Lehmann 160
Gilchrist 101 not out

West Indies: 408
Ganga 117
Lara 91
Samuels 68

Lee 4 wickets, Gillespie 3 wickets, MacGill 2 wickets, Hogg 1 wicket.

Australia 2nd innings: 1 for 31 (lead 199)
Hayden 15 not out
Ponting 10 not out

Kenny_01

22 Apr 2003, 12:59

The test is at an interesting stage. Hopefully we will rack up 150-200 quick runs tomorrow and give ourselves a day and a half to bowl them out.

Clackers69

22 Apr 2003, 13:24

We should be looking at no less then 400 runs as a target. Any team with Lara in it has the ability to chase down any target, however history has shown that 400 does not get reached in the 4th innings too many times. Anything less and we are giving them a change to steal the game. These are small grounds with fast outfields and the Windies have a couple of batsmen in good form.

Fall Out Boy

22 Apr 2003, 14:18

Originally posted by Kenny_01
The test is at an interesting stage. Hopefully we will rack up 150-200 quick runs tomorrow and give ourselves a day and a half to bowl them out.

We won't need more then four sessions imho.

I'd be batting til either 30 minutes before or after tea (depending on the scoring rate).

We need a lead of 400, minimum.

mattyc2422

22 Apr 2003, 15:49

Good to see Marlon Samuels getting a bit of rhythm up. I like the guy and I hope he keeps putting in some good performances.

As for Steve Waughs bowling..Oh jeez. :p

Fall Out Boy

22 Apr 2003, 16:09

Originally posted by mattyc2422

As for Steve Waughs bowling..Oh jeez. :p

Why on earth did he bowl?

Obviously he was looking to nip one back, but really, we missed a golden opportunity to attack the new batsmen with some real quality fast bowling.

Steve, where's your head at?

JUBJUB

22 Apr 2003, 16:10

Nice to see umpire De Silva give his 'Shocking Decision Of The Day' to Langer [again !!!!!!!!!!!]
The umps new nickname is 'A-Shoka De Silva' :p

Jaymin

22 Apr 2003, 16:10

Did anyone see Langers 2nd innings dismissal? What the hell is Asoka doing!??!

I guess at least he was looking in the general direction when he gave him out....

I'm surprised langer didn't wrap his bat around De Silvas head....

JUBJUB

22 Apr 2003, 16:11

Originally posted by phatandphreaky
Why on earth did he bowl?

He almost had a wicket early on,but it dropped just in front of Gilchrist.
I'd prefer to see Ponting bowl ahead of Waugh.

red+black

22 Apr 2003, 16:37

i have not seen langer's second innings dismissal. can someone give an unbiased appraisal? was it DEFINATELY not out? it's about time something was done about these "elite" umpires. they should be made to defend their decisions, or publicly admit that they got a decision or two wrong. the world should be made aware as to what steps are being taken to improve the performance of umpires when they start going silly.

does AdS know the LBW rule? i'd like him to explain it at a press conference. I would like him to explain what he was doing, and where he was looking when he gave Ponting out? I want him to be asked why he did not refer it to the 3rd umpire.

I think the pattern of poor umpiring decisions is becoming all too obvious. The LBW decisions and the stumping (or was he run out), apart from all being made by AdS, were made without referral to the 3rd umpire. Some of you may prefer to leave technology out of it, but the time has come.

I say, any time an umpire gives an OUT decision such as LBW, stumped, run out or caught, it should be referred to the 3rd umpire for confirmation. I think the complaints are greater when a batsman is giving out when they are not out, than when a batsman is not given out when they are.

A TV replay would have easily confirmed that Langer and Hayden were NOT OUT in the first innings, and that Ponting was indeed out of his ground. The Match Referee should talk to AdS to ensure that while he did give the correct decision, he needs to pay greater attention to the play, and not appear to be looking away from the action.

dr nick

22 Apr 2003, 17:05

yes, they should at least explain how they came to a decision like "i couldnt see a deflection" and fair enough for not giving a caught behind.

but an excuse like "i thought it pitched on leg stump" will not cut it. doubts go the batsmans way. i'd be especially interested in his reasoning for giving ponting out. i think it would go something like...
"i thought the ball was dead, then next thing i know the bails were removed. i didnt want to look like a moron by going to the video for ponting might have been out by a metre, so rather than drawing attention to the fact that i looked away and daydreamt rather than doing the job i am paid to do, i took a gamble"

EagleBlue

22 Apr 2003, 17:23

Originally posted by red+black

I say, any time an umpire gives an OUT decision such as LBW, stumped, run out or caught, it should be referred to the 3rd umpire for confirmation. I think the complaints are greater when a batsman is giving out when they are not out, than when a batsman is not given out when they are.

What about the decisions that are given Not Out that were out such as Lehmanns and Laras in this test and the batsman (cant remember who) that Waugh appeared to have plumb LBW in the last test ????? They are just as bad. Leave the 3rd umpire to run outs and stumpings, we are struggling to get 90 overs in a days play as it is, without having more unnecessary stoppages. Giving ALL elite umpires a rules test to see if they know ALL of the rules of the game would be a good start, because it is obvious that at least 2 (Tiffen and DeSilva) dont realize that you cannot be out LBW if the ball pitches outside leg stump

EagleBlue

22 Apr 2003, 17:29

Originally posted by nicko18
"i thought the ball was dead, then next thing i know the bails were removed. i didnt want to look like a moron by going to the video for ponting might have been out by a metre, so rather than drawing attention to the fact that i looked away and daydreamt rather than doing the job i am paid to do, i took a gamble"

Very good :D

The thing that ****s me is that IMO the best umpire in the World, Steve Bucknor is not allowed to umpire because of the home team factor. THAT decision is only marginally behind appointing a match referee at all internationals as the worst made by the Incompetent Cricket Council

Minkus_Swan

22 Apr 2003, 19:35

Langer's LBW wasn't that bad. It kept very low, and to me it looked out... but then the replay showed it was clearly outside the line of off stump.

Did anyone see the appeal by Drakes? He bloody stood right in the face of De-Silva and screamed the appeal. Bit of the sub-continent appealing there!

JUBJUB

22 Apr 2003, 23:57

Originally posted by Minkus_Swan

Did anyone see the appeal by Drakes? He bloody stood right in the face of De-Silva and screamed the appeal. Bit of the sub-continent appealing there!

He actually looked to be moving closer to the umpire when appealing.I thought he was trying to intimdate the ump.

red+black

23 Apr 2003, 00:34

Originally posted by EagleBlue
Leave the 3rd umpire to run outs and stumpings, we are struggling to get 90 overs in a days play as it is, without having more unnecessary stoppages.
Had to bite at this. I don't buy your argument. I think fielding teams are becoming increasingly incompetent. The rate of overs/hour seems to be decreasing all the time, to the point that they might as well say, oh well, 60 overs a day is a good effort.

Teams could bowl 100 overs within 6 hours if they really wanted to. One rule change to make that a reality would be to ensure that batsmen don't waste time by readjusting their helmet, doing some gardening, looking around to all parts of the field after every ball, etc etc.

Black Thunder

23 Apr 2003, 01:26

1/94 from 32 overs at the moment.

Hayden is 44 of 91 and Ponting is 36 of 80.

Both are batting well.

So far we have got 5/around 680. 3 wickets were from dodgy lbw decisions and the other was a run out from a complete misjudgement from Ponting, meaning the Windies have so far only worked for 1 wicket for nearly 700 runs :D

GoEagles

23 Apr 2003, 02:33

Ok I saw the Langer LBW on TV a few hours ago and it was a shocker. Clearly to me it seemed to be missing the stumps. Drakes appeal was interesting too - seemed to be in a fencing position with the knees bent, and the one arm straight in front of his body, about to lunge at De Silva

red+black

23 Apr 2003, 04:57

another Asoka shocker:

1.4 Gillespie to Smith, OUT: good length delivery, pitched wide outside the off stump and angling in, Smith moves across to play but gets hit on the pad, huge appeal and umpire Asoka de Silva raises his finger, Smith gets a pair!

TV replays show that the ball hit the pad outside the line of the off stump, Smith can consider himself unlucky

ball hit him outside the line. i think that's five or six errors of judgement now. he also gave lehmann 4 runs when Samuels got the ball to spin away, missing bat, going past the keeper to the rope for 4 byes.

and to larry de silva on rec.sport.cricket, yep, Asoka's crap because he's a black Sri Lankan, that's what everyone's been saying :rolleyes:

EagleBlue

23 Apr 2003, 07:48

Originally posted by red+black
Had to bite at this. I don't buy your argument. I think fielding teams are becoming increasingly incompetent. The rate of overs/hour seems to be decreasing all the time, to the point that they might as well say, oh well, 60 overs a day is a good effort.

Teams could bowl 100 overs within 6 hours if they really wanted to. One rule change to make that a reality would be to ensure that batsmen don't waste time by readjusting their helmet, doing some gardening, looking around to all parts of the field after every ball, etc etc.

Agree, but fielding sides will NOT improve their over rate whilst the ridiculous fines system is in place

ScouseCat

23 Apr 2003, 07:59

STUMPS - DAY 4:

Australia: 4 for 576 declared
Ponting 206
Lehmann 160
Gilchrist 101 not out

West Indies: 408
Ganga 117
Lara 91
Samuels 68

Lee 4 wickets, Gillespie 3 wickets, MacGill 2 wickets, Hogg 1 wicket.

Australia 2nd innings: 3 for 238 declared
Hayden 100 not out
Lehmann 66
Ponting 45

West Indies 2nd innings: 3 for 107 (target 407)
Lara 52 not out
Sarwan 0 not out

Gillespie 2 wickets, MacGill 1 wicket.

GoEagles

23 Apr 2003, 18:11

Should be a great day of cricket ahead.

I've got the feeling that if we can get Lara out early today, we've got the test and the series wrapped up.

hans moleman

24 Apr 2003, 00:04

Originally posted by red+black
another Asoka shocker:

1.4 Gillespie to Smith, OUT: good length delivery, pitched wide outside the off stump and angling in, Smith moves across to play but gets hit on the pad, huge appeal and umpire Asoka de Silva raises his finger, Smith gets a pair!

TV replays show that the ball hit the pad outside the line of the off stump, Smith can consider himself unlucky

ball hit him outside the line.

agree with this - the ball hit him just outside the line with the ball angling in - a dodgy decision. Very similar to Langer's dismissal, but no suprise that in this case the news reports didn't say anything about Smith being unlucky...

on a side note, i don't usually listen to cricket on the radio (since it's usually on FTA TV), but i'm quite enjoying it. Eg lehmann is "pudgy but pugnacious" - for some reason i found that funny.

dr nick

24 Apr 2003, 00:23

Originally posted by hans moleman
agree with this - the ball hit him just outside the line with the ball angling in - a dodgy decision. Very similar to Langer's dismissal, but no suprise that in this case the news reports didn't say anything about Smith being unlucky...

on a side note, i don't usually listen to cricket on the radio (since it's usually on FTA TV), but i'm quite enjoying it. Eg lehmann is "pudgy but pugnacious" - for some reason i found that funny.

youve been missing out my friend. the ABC have some of the best commentators in the world. if the tv wasnt a good 3 seconds behind the radio, i'd mute the TV

hans moleman

24 Apr 2003, 00:36

Originally posted by nicko18
youve been missing out my friend. the ABC have some of the best commentators in the world. if the tv wasnt a good 3 seconds behind the radio, i'd mute the TV
i actually did start muting the tv during last summer's matches - i just snapped and couldn't take any more of greig's overbearing, incorrect, grating commentary...
needless to say, the comedy on the radio is much more 'natural' - from the little i've heard, there seems to be a more relaxed, enjoyable atmosphere about the radio commentators (and of course there's kerry o'keefe).

dr nick

24 Apr 2003, 00:58

many years of my childhood were spent with the walkman under the pillow listening to the Ashes, West Indian and other tours. i also think football is better commentated (and much more exciting) on the radio

larrikin

24 Apr 2003, 01:18

mattyc2422

24 Apr 2003, 01:57

Lara just brought up his ton.
The Windies have a remote chance, but it's possible.

And I agree, the cricket commentary on radio is great. I love some of the banter they have.

Black Thunder

24 Apr 2003, 02:10

I'll tell you what I think we are in a spot of bother.

I dont usually like negative cricket, but I thought that we shouldve just batted the second innings out and forgot about it - no matter what we set them there was to much risk on a wicket as good as this with Lara in the batting line-up. Although I know Steve Waugh would never do that.

There are now 3/210 at lunch and Lara and Sarwan are well and truly set.

If they go the next hour without losing a wicket they'll win it.

DaveW

24 Apr 2003, 02:38

Originally posted by Black Thunder
I dont usually like negative cricket, but I thought that we shouldve just batted the second innings out and forgot about it - no matter what we set them there was to much risk on a wicket as good as this with Lara in the batting line-up. Although I know Steve Waugh would never do that.

I would have gone for another 50 runs. Especially since we had Gilchrist still to come.

Black Thunder

24 Apr 2003, 02:52

Originally posted by DaveW
I would have gone for another 50 runs. Especially since we had Gilchrist still to come.

yea agreed, and we needed to score quicker.

The problem was, because they wicket is so good, we needed at least 4 sessions to bowl them out, but we needed to score at more than 4 an over (we went at 3.3) in the second dig to give ourselves 4 sessions and a score which was out of reach.

I'll make a prediction here though - the match will go to the last hour/half-hour of the day, and the final result will be less than 20 or 30 runs. I think we should get up but it will depend on whether Lara is still in.

A lot will depend though on what happens with the new ball which is going to be taken in 15 overs.

I know this will be the biggest chase in the history of test cricket, but if it was ever giong to happen it is here. Australia without there 2 best bowlers on an absolute road with one of the great batsmen at the crease in full form.

Black Thunder

24 Apr 2003, 02:58

well Bichs just got the breakthrough of Sarwan, which will hinder the Windies big time but with Lara theres still hope for them.

Right idea for Sarwan just poor execution - didn't have a grip on the bat at all.

Black Thunder

24 Apr 2003, 03:20

Bich just got Samules lbw, so there won't be much left to support Lara if the Windies want to win it.

Still seeing up to see he Lara show though - this much ain't over by a long way.

Deestroy

24 Apr 2003, 03:27

Another wicket!
Bernard B.Bichel C.Hayden for 4

Black Thunder

24 Apr 2003, 03:30

Bich got another - Bernard caught by Hayden at first slip.

Going to need some great support from Baugh here is Lara.

Black Thunder

24 Apr 2003, 03:42

Laras gone, games gone, i'm gone to bed

Deestroy

24 Apr 2003, 03:53

Hogg strikes, and it's well and truly over.

CS Baugh c Langer b Hogg 1

WI 8/240

The Floodbuster

24 Apr 2003, 05:22

Congratulations again to Australia.
Special mention for Jason Gillespie getting the winning wicket to Retain the Frank Worrell trophy.

My hat is off to you son.

EagleBlue

24 Apr 2003, 09:47

Originally posted by The Floodbuster
Special mention for Jason Gillespie getting the winning wicket to Retain the Frank Worrell trophy.

My hat is off to you son.

Here, Here !!!!!

That is the positive to come out of McGrath not being there. Gillespie is now getting the recognition (and wickets) he has deserved for a long time. (The same cant be said for the hairdo though !!!! :D

Slax

24 Apr 2003, 10:37

Good win but one of the spinners has to go for McGrath for the next test. I would drop MacGill personally. Also does anyone know if Ponting got reported by the match referee for his incident yesterday after he was dismissed, I thought it was pretty ordinarry by him.

red+black

24 Apr 2003, 10:48

Dillon hit him, albeit inadvertantly, he's the one that should have had a word or two spoken to him. punter also wasn't happy after his first innings dismissal, but that was Ashocker's fault, as was most things in the test.

i do have issues with bowlers that follow through to within a few feet of the batsman. that needs to be taken out of the game.

TheMase

24 Apr 2003, 11:20

Originally posted by Slax
Good win but one of the spinners has to go for McGrath for the next test. I would drop MacGill personally. Also does anyone know if Ponting got reported by the match referee for his incident yesterday after he was dismissed, I thought it was pretty ordinarry by him.

MacGill bowled much better than Hogg in this test!!

MacGill got 4 wickets to Hogg's 2
MacGill bowled far more economical than Hogg did.

dr nick

24 Apr 2003, 11:26

Originally posted by TheMase
MacGill bowled much better than Hogg in this test!!

MacGill got 4 wickets to Hogg's 2
MacGill bowled far more economical than Hogg did.

100% agree with this.

and watching him bowl last night... well i'd rather be facing shane warne i'd have to say. to say he was turning them square would almost be an understatement.

TheMase

24 Apr 2003, 14:56

Originally posted by nicko18
100% agree with this.

and watching him bowl last night... well i'd rather be facing shane warne i'd have to say. to say he was turning them square would almost be an understatement.

Just looking at the stats and MacGill has outbowled Hogg in BOTH of the tests so far.

ScouseCat

24 Apr 2003, 15:44

Originally posted by TheMase
Just looking at the stats and MacGill has outbowled Hogg in BOTH of the tests so far.

There's no doubt Stuart MacGill has taken more wickets so far in this series, but Brad Hogg's batting means we can get away with playing 5 bowlers in the team. (2 spinners)

The real question is, would either Hogg or MacGill be playing if the great Shane Warne was in the team?? I don't think so!! :D

dr nick

24 Apr 2003, 15:49

Originally posted by ScouseCat

The real question is, would either Hogg or MacGill be playing if the great Shane Warne was in the team?? I don't think so!! :D

would carl lewis have won the gold if ben johnson was allowed to run?

ScouseCat

24 Apr 2003, 15:54

Originally posted by nicko18
would carl lewis have won the gold if ben johnson was allowed to run?

I hardly think that is a fair comparison... my point is that Australia have never needed to play 5 bowlers in the team while McGrath and Warne were playing.

They never played 2 spinners either unless the pitch was a spinners wicket and it was at the expense of one of the fast bowlers.