2019 2nd Ashes Test - Lords 14-18 August 2019

A Pom

Team Captain
Aug 1, 2019
433
106
AFL Club
Sydney
What happens if last night Australia is within striking distance of the total when the umpires say only the spinners can bowl and Root unleashes Archer just to bounce people?
Then people complain about the umpires, claim Root is unsporting and state "this wouldn't have happened if England were batting".
 

samFFC

Brownlow Medallist
Jul 1, 2013
12,933
9,322
AFL Club
Fremantle
Other Teams
Fulham, 76ers, Cubs, Bills
They don’t drop Head and they have a pretty good chance last night on what they did set!
Yup! But they didn't give themselves the best chance.

They had us on the ropes this test despite losing the toss, Archer has half our batsmen scared s**tless, Smith completely carries our Batting and he will either not play or play under duress... So yea, they'll be feeling confident.

If they went quick early and lost a bunch of wickets they could of been bowled up cheaply and given us most of the day to chase a much smaller total, which would of been an absolute disaster.
Marnus and Head managed okay with Archer. Woakes only bowled a few overs.
That can't be sustained through another 3 tests.

Agreed that if they'd lost a bunch of wickets, but they could also try to defend and build a total. Their tail can hang around.

What happens if last night Australia is within striking distance of the total when the umpires say only the spinners can bowl and Root unleashes Archer just to bounce people?
Is that still the bad light rule? I had thought there was changes about offering the light (i.e. they don't , the umps decide) and needing to bowl spinners (i.e. if you stay on, anyone can bowl?). Could be wrong though. Can't get a straight answer in my searching.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

A Pom

Team Captain
Aug 1, 2019
433
106
AFL Club
Sydney
Is that still the bad light rule? I had thought there was changes about offering the light (i.e. they don't , the umps decide) and needing to bowl spinners (i.e. if you stay on, anyone can bowl?). Could be wrong though. Can't get a straight answer in my searching.
The umpires no longer offer the option to the batsman about the light like they used to but they can still tell the fielding team that they'd consider the light inadequate if a pace bowler was bowling.
 

samFFC

Brownlow Medallist
Jul 1, 2013
12,933
9,322
AFL Club
Fremantle
Other Teams
Fulham, 76ers, Cubs, Bills
The umpires no longer offer the option to the batsman about the light like they used to but they can still tell the fielding team that they're going off unless a spinner is bowling.
But then in eddiesmith 's scenario why wouldn't Root just bowl pacemen?
 

frankrizzo

Brownlow Medallist
Jan 6, 2004
10,176
7,756
What happens if last night Australia is within striking distance of the total when the umpires say only the spinners can bowl and Root unleashes Archer just to bounce people?
They go off the field, the batsmen don't get a choice anymore.

Would be no issue with england doing that either they are under no obligation to bowl spin it's just a heads up from the umps that they will go off if they bowl the quicks.
 

Nankervis brothers

Premiership Player
Aug 16, 2006
4,498
4,920
AFL Club
Geelong
What's that got to do with it? In both cases there's an artificial substance in the saliva which by the exact wording of the law isn't allowed. The fact the ICC haven't taken action against people for either despite a wide range of footage and public confessions being available for both shows they consider it an allowable grey area.
That's right. Ball tampering.

But overall, congratulations on not addressing my main argument on three seperate occasions. Well done, too, in flatly refusing to adress the examples of Atherton, or Panesar using his zip. You excel in the dubious arts of 'internet debating'. Carry on now, and be sure to neglect anything that contradicts your bias. All the best ratting on Smith for the same things you would accept in an English player.
 

A Pom

Team Captain
Aug 1, 2019
433
106
AFL Club
Sydney
That's right. Ball tampering.

But overall, congratulations on not addressing my main argument on three seperate occasions. Well done, too, in flatly refusing to adress the examples of Atherton, or Panesar using his zip. You excel in the dubious arts of 'internet debating'. Carry on now, and be sure to neglect anything that contradicts your bias. All the best ratting on Smith for the same things you would accept in an English player.
So you've concluded it's ball tampering to have a sugary drink and subsequently shine the ball?

If you bothered to read other posts you'd notice I've addressed the Atherton point. Admittedly I haven't read Panesar's book and wasn't aware of what he says he did which I clearly condemn. Presumably he can't have done it whilst playing for England though given an England kit hasn't had zips for as long as I can remember.
 

Nankervis brothers

Premiership Player
Aug 16, 2006
4,498
4,920
AFL Club
Geelong
So you've concluded it's ball tampering to have a sugary drink and subsequently shine the ball?

If you bothered to read other posts you'd notice I've addressed the Atherton point. Admittedly I haven't read Panesar's book and wasn't aware of what he says he did which I clearly condemn. Presumably he can't have done it whilst playing for England though given an England kit hasn't had zips for as long as I can remember.
No, that's not what I said. Not even vaguely. I'm not going to repeat my argument. It's there for you to read. If you can't see any double standard in English fans calling Smith a cheat while simultaneously celebrating Atherton and Paneser then you are too far down the rabbit hole to be worth any further time.
 

A Pom

Team Captain
Aug 1, 2019
433
106
AFL Club
Sydney
No, that's not what I said. Not even vaguely. I'm not going to repeat my argument. It's there for you to read. If you can't see any double standard in English fans calling Smith a cheat while simultaneously celebrating Atherton and Paneser then you are too far down the rabbit hole to be worth any further time.
It is quite literally exactly what you have just said:

What's that got to do with it? In both cases (sucking on mints and drinking sugary drinks) there's an artificial substance in the saliva which by the exact wording of the law isn't allowed.
To which your response was:
Nankervis brothers said:
That's right. Ball tampering.
 

Seedsfan

Brownlow Medallist
Oct 10, 2013
10,644
6,194
AFL Club
Collingwood
Not a comment without merit but if moving countries and becoming a citizen of that country is perfectly legal in general life, then why should it be any different for sport?
Still legal and fine but you pledge your allegiance to one side
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

A Pom

Team Captain
Aug 1, 2019
433
106
AFL Club
Sydney
I was referring to the mints, not sugary drinks, as mints (as I've pointed out to you) also contains oils which create the desired effect of swing.
The law doesn't differentiate between what's effective and what's not. It states it's illegal to apply an artificial substance to the ball which both this saliva containing this oil and saliva containing sugar from sugary drinks is. The sandpaper didn't appear to do Australia much good in South Africa getting the ball moving but the players involved didn't get off with it because of that.
 

JackOutback

Brownlow Medallist
Sep 15, 2011
19,902
25,127
AFL Club
West Coast
Australia’s have erred by not taking more bats. There’s no real need for Holland in the squad but we could sure use some options. Realistically, Bancroft should be dropped but Warner’s playing even worse, I have no more faith in Harris. Burns would probably offer some resistance at this point.
 

Seedsfan

Brownlow Medallist
Oct 10, 2013
10,644
6,194
AFL Club
Collingwood
Firstly, I think you're conveniently making a rule that would rule Jofra Archer out of this series.

Secondly, there are plenty of good reasons for someone to move countries after the age of 19, and you risk excluding people for what is a fairly arbitrary rule.

Thirdly, pretty much every sport n the world allows you to change countries given a certain qualification criteria.

Fourthly, you're forcing 16-18 year olds to make a decision that could be to their detriment. Imagine being someone who could qualify for more than one country - they may just stay out of underage competition to avoid having to make a decision, which could hurt them in the long run.


And on Archer specifically, he has a British father, and has only ever played first class cricket in England. He moved from Barbados to England, and so I don't see why he should be excluded from playing for them because he played a few warm-up games for the West Indies under 19s.
Keaton Jennings, Sam Robson and so many more have played all their pathway cricket elsewhere. It’s unfair especially on the poorer nations as they will keep losing players. If you don’t want to represent a nation because you want to play elsewhere don’t.

I don’t really care about Archer I want to see the best players playing test cricket but I think at the moment we have problems especially with South African’s and West Indian’s turning their back on test cricket. We have already lost the West Indies as a power and we are losing South Africa at the moment.
 

Nankervis brothers

Premiership Player
Aug 16, 2006
4,498
4,920
AFL Club
Geelong
The law doesn't differentiate between what's effective and what's not. It states it's illegal to apply an artificial substance to the ball which both this saliva containing this oil and saliva containing sugar from sugary drinks is. The sandpaper didn't appear to do Australia much good in South Africa getting the ball moving but the players involved didn't get off with it because of that.
Perhaps they should have experimented with different grit sandpapers, just as the English experimented with different type of mints. You know, to find the most the effective.
 

eddiesmith

Hall of Famer
Jul 12, 2004
48,553
6,010
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
England Cronulla
Australia’s have erred by not taking more bats. There’s no real need for Holland in the squad but we could sure use some options. Realistically, Bancroft should be dropped but Warner’s playing even worse, I have no more faith in Harris. Burns would probably offer some resistance at this point.
Holland isn’t in the squad
 

A Pom

Team Captain
Aug 1, 2019
433
106
AFL Club
Sydney
Perhaps they should have experimented with different grit sandpapers, just as the English experimented with different type of mints. You know, to find the most the effective.
Something of which you have absolutely no proof. How people can interpret Trescothick saying he didn't like a specific type of mints (which had been identified as the ones that had been allowing Warwickshire to get more prolonged swing than other teams in the county championship) because they were too dry as Trescothick saying he experimented with different types of mints to find the most effective at getting the ball to swing I have no idea.
 

Seedsfan

Brownlow Medallist
Oct 10, 2013
10,644
6,194
AFL Club
Collingwood
Something of which you have absolutely no proof. How people can interpret Trescothick saying he didn't like a specific type of mints (which had been identified as the ones that had been allowing Warwickshire to get more prolonged swing than other teams in the county championship) because they were too dry as Trescothick saying he experimented with different types of mints to find the most effective at getting the ball to swing I have no idea.
Who cares? Everyone tampers with the ball we got caught you didn’t that time but have done in the past.
 

Doodlesweaver

Brownlow Medallist
Apr 17, 2010
13,611
5,664
AFL Club
Fremantle
Not a comment without merit but if moving countries and becoming a citizen of that country is perfectly legal in general life, then why should it be any different for sport?
Not to mention that some boards treat their players bloody awfully, financially and otherwise. I really don't blame players for shifting if it is in the interest of their long-term career and it's a possibility for them.
 

Top Bottom