BBL Game 4 Melbourne Renegades v Perth Scorchers 1845hrs @ Kardinia Park

[Dennis_Bergkamp]

What do you think woke means?

In this day and age I define woke as

What do you think woke means?

define Woke as Soft..Weak… Compliant…
Is there any other definition you’d like to inform me of?

 

[Freight Train]

Absolute rocks-in-your-head stuff if you think it’s soft to have that game called off.

That Eski LBW was probably a fair indication that the bounce was dangerous, given it would have been plumb otherwise but ball tracking showed it going 30cm over the stumps. The ball was also taking literal divots out of the surface upon impact, only making the surface more and more dangerous as play goes on, and then to have it torn to shreds with the Scorchers bowling second would have been havoc.

“Wouldn’t have happened back in myyyyyyy daaayyyyyyy” Yeah alright thanks, but it’s a good thing that player safety is more important in this day and age, and comparing a cracked up Test wicket where evading, blocking and leaving are forming 90% of your shots to a Big Bash surface where you’re expected to go 8-10 R.P.O is apples and oranges stuff.

Unfortunate that the game was called off but the right decision made. I do feel for the groundies, not as if this is an outcome they would have wanted and a lot of the conjecture across social media regarding poor covering of the pitch is pretty misinformed.

At least the weather forecast looks good in Launceston for tomorrow night!

 

[MJG14]

Never thought that we would have so many quality cricketers capable of facing 130km/h+ bowling on spicy pitches in this thread (and miraculously a whole heap elsewhere online as well!)

 

[happy_eagle]

define Woke as Soft..Weak… Compliant…

Who do you imagine would be for these things ?

Sounds to me like your definition of woke is actually "things I don't like/understand and that make me feel old"

 

[The Lobbster]

I kind of agree with you.

I actually thought the pre-game pitch report may have influenced the game getting called off. It must have got through the coaches and players' heads. I mean Channel 7 were in the Perth Scorchers changerooms so you would imagine that they would have had the telecast on whilst watching from the sidelines. (Tye was also doing his death starring thing with Channel 7) Ponting , Maxwell and Finch were hesitant if the game would go ahead or be stopped.

Like the last ball of the match from Sutherland, I dont think that was dangerous. And even if a couple of those were aligned to Inglis' head, should it be about batting technique to avoid a bouncer? Isnt that what cricket is all about to judge a wicket and play accordingly? And we have to remember Inglis last couple of months he has been playing on roads in India. Wickets that were streamlined for the batters to accumulate runs.

I believe cricket and even in T20 , should be a test for both batters and bowlers. If you get a wicket like that in Geelong, it should be a test of your survival technique as well. A test whether you can reassess a score based on that wicket as a batter. I reckon even a target of say 90-100 runs would have been an enthralling encounter of the batsmans temperament. Too often now with T20s is the mindset is you come out there and you think 'we need 160 to defend'. And if it isnt a 160+ wicket , the blame will go on the ground curators or whether or what not.

I can understand the frustration as to why the game was called off.

I guess this is the fundamental difference in people arguing for or against the decision.

For me, cricket batting is a balance between scoring and protecting your WICKET. In this case bouncers are a natural part of cricket as they are designed to unsettle you into giving your wicket away. However bouncers can be avoided with a proper technique, eyes on the ball etc.

However tonight, the last 3 balls of the match all pitched in a similar area yet all 3 bounced at completely different heights (stumps, torso, helmet). At this point, correct technique no longer can stop you getting hit. It’s pure chance. The ball could pitch short, the batter ducks, the ball skids into the helmet. Or it pitches a good length, the batter plays a shot, the ball rears into the helmet.

However I must acknowledge that I’ve never really played cricket at any level. However the fact that the Fox commentators, the 7 commentators and Finchy on the mike all seems to think it was dangerous was enough for me. These experts played in earlier times with more dangerous wickets but seem to acknowledge that maybe that was a mistake. Just because it DID happen doesn’t mean it SHOULD’VE.

For me, I would rather a game get abandoned a bit prematurely than see someone get hit and it abandoned later.

(Caps because my phone doesn’t allow holding)

 

[happy_eagle]

Like the last ball of the match from Sutherland, I dont think that was dangerous. And even if a couple of those were aligned to Inglis' head, should it be about batting technique to avoid a bouncer? Isnt that what cricket is all about to judge a wicket and play accordingly? And we have to remember Inglis last couple of months he has been playing on roads in India. Wickets that were streamlined for the batters to accumulate runs.

When you are facing a delivery at 130kmh+ you have a fraction of a second to make a judgement based on where the ball is likely to pitch and where it is likely to end up as it leaves the bowlers hand and play your shot accordingly.

When you have a defective pitch like tonight it basically makes the ability to make the decision to get out of the way of a delivery that could be coming for your head impossible. Not difficult. Impossible. Nothing you would see coming out of the bowlers hand would indicate that the ball was coming for your head. It's not until the ball hits the surface (by then its far too late to make the call to duck) that you'd have any idea whether it would be heading for your head or the stumps.

 

[Dennis_Bergkamp]

Honestly I’m genuinely concerned that rather than being commentators for the game… they were more interested in promoting the concept of an abandoned fixture… which from a column inches/verity score is probably a better result in a promotional sense…

Yes im happy to agree that bounce was inconsistent… but It was top spinning through surface bounce… rather than dangerous spongy trampolined bounce.

 

[NYRB]

When you are facing a delivery at 130kmh+ you have a fraction of a second to make a judgement based on where the ball is likely to pitch and where it is likely to end up as it leaves the bowlers hand and play your shot accordingly.

When you have a defective pitch like tonight it basically makes the ability to make the decision to get out of the way of a delivery that could be coming for your head impossible. Not difficult. Impossible. Nothing you would see coming out of the bowlers hand would indicate that the ball was coming for your head. It's not until the ball hits the surface (by then its far too late to make the call to duck) that you'd have any idea whether it would be heading for your head or the stumps.

You may well be right… but from what I saw it appeared the dangerous area was aaay from a dangerous lign and afforded batsmen enough ability for evasive actions as required…

Whilst never being at State/Domestic/international standards I’ve played 130kmh plus cricketers for my school on dodgy water damage wickets and survived.

It just seemed to me to be a lost opportunity to highlight victory over adversity…. It really should have been a Renegades brand moment…

 

[happy_eagle]

Whilst never being at State/Domestic/international standards I’ve played 130kmh plus cricketers for my school on dodgy water damage wickets and survived.

School kids are bowling 130 clicks these days ?

Geez what are they feeding them

 

[Dennis_Bergkamp]

School kids are bowling 130 clicks these days ?

Geez what are they feeding them

Midweek Cricket in the 90s was a genuine Men’s Comp against boys…

 

[big_e]

I know tonight was not a completed match.

But Perth Scrochers and Sydney Sixers wouldnt select a De Kock in their side. Not necessarily because he isnt a bad player. They arent after the limelights. Their recruiting is spot on usually as they select players that are generally on the fringe of international selections.

Maybe the Gades need to lower their expectation with their imports because if he isnt going to be there for the Playoffs, it kind of defeats the purpose of having him there.

Perth Scorchers im pretty sure wouldnt pick a player like that if he doesnt really want to be there mainly due to : squad depth, having the longest travel compared to other BBL teams and to not disrupt team chemistry.

Scorchers have Zak Crawley flying in for half a season, having had Faf Du Plessis for half a season last year, before he flew out to another comp. Jason Roy played less than a full season one year, too. Probably a few other lesser lights you could mention, as well.

 

[Ephemeral Hope]

It was unsafe. Right call was made.

The only thing I’m upset about is the state of the pitch itself. Can’t believe they let it get that bad and still started it

 

[Tugga27]

If the Supercoach salaries are any indication , de Kock is getting paid $180,000 salary for a potential 5-6 game stint. That equates to $30k-$36k per game.

He must be laughing off his socks and this is little wonder he didnt look to bothered coming off early tonight.

As a platinum selection, If QDK plays 8 games, he will get $360 000.

 

[Tugga27]

I kind of agree with you.

I actually thought the pre-game pitch report may have influenced the game getting called off. It must have got through the coaches and players' heads. I mean Channel 7 were in the Perth Scorchers changerooms so you would imagine that they would have had the telecast on whilst watching from the sidelines. (Tye was also doing his death starring thing with Channel 7) Ponting , Maxwell and Finch were hesitant if the game would go ahead or be stopped.

Like the last ball of the match from Sutherland, I dont think that was dangerous. And even if a couple of those were aligned to Inglis' head, should it be about batting technique to avoid a bouncer? Isnt that what cricket is all about to judge a wicket and play accordingly? And we have to remember Inglis last couple of months he has been playing on roads in India. Wickets that were streamlined for the batters to accumulate runs.

I believe cricket and even in T20 , should be a test for both batters and bowlers. If you get a wicket like that in Geelong, it should be a test of your survival technique as well. A test whether you can reassess a score based on that wicket as a batter. I reckon even a target of say 90-100 runs would have been an enthralling encounter of the batsmans temperament. Too often now with T20s is the mindset is you come out there and you think 'we need 160 to defend'. And if it isnt a 160+ wicket , the blame will go on the ground curators or whether or what not.

I can understand the frustration as to why the game was called off.

I'm not an advocate of producing roads, but when you have players like Ponting and Maxwell saying the game shouldn't have even started, that's good enough for me.

Rogers and Sutherland looked like Ambrose and Marshall.

If WA won the toss, and Richardson was bowling at 145km plus, the game wouldn't have last 4 overs.

 

[The Falcon Strike]

Perth essentially stick to their WA squad - they don’t need to import, Victoria splits into 2 teams and take out the few international players we have and you’ve got…nothing

Half our squad or WA products plays east - we could fill a second side

Marsh
Philippe
Bancroft
Cartwright
Stoinis
Short
Wells
David
Coulter Nile
Paris
Guthrie

 

[NYRB]

I may have read this wrong and Im not sure if anyone here can answer this for me but are the Premium players (international) included as part of the $3 million salary cap?

Premium international players can get paid at least $420,000 per year.

The top 6 domestic players of each franchise can get paid up to $1.7 million combined.

Eg a team like Perth you would imagine their best 6 domestic players in their squad would be: Turner, Richardson, Inglis, Tye, Behrendorff and Ashton Agar.

Players wages in BBL and WBBL soar as T20 competitions explode around the world

Test stars could sign in Big Bash cash splash as salary cap balloons to $3 million

www.foxsports.com.au

I was just thinking about De Kocks earnings for a potential 6-7 game appearance fee last night. Imagine getting paid $60-$70 k per game, and rocking up for 6.5 overs . No wonder he was smirking behind the gloves. it seems bananas .

 

[Gavin Excell]

Good to see refunds made to fans

 

[4Seasons]

Honestly this is a symbol of the travesty of woke Australia.
Pitch was a “little bit unusual”
Not Danegous
Not jumping up at the “head is sacred” area.
Just different and trampolining slow….

So perhaps you just suck it and see…
Like the old timers used to do… on a “sticky wicket”
If I was Crixket Australia I’d be livid and both teams and their soft attitude and comments

Seems to me that 80% of current BBL participants would retire hurt lest face Malcolm Marshall, Big Bird or anyone of that ilk…

Are you to old to remember Phil Hughes?

 

[TubbsFarquhar]

In this day and age I define woke as

define Woke as Soft..Weak… Compliant…
Is there any other definition you’d like to inform me of?

The original definition is to be alert of societal issues (especially racism), but now it's been hijacked to deride anything people don't like.

 

[cats_09]

 

[eth-dog]

The original definition is to be alert of societal issues (especially racism), but now it's been hijacked to deride anything people don't like.

RWNJ's love misappropriating words for what they don't like and use it as an insult

 

[PhatBoy]

I don’t even think it’s the ‘back in my day’ factor that makes this a bit more than just a straight out ‘hey it’s obviously dangerous’ argument.

It’s the format.

I watched a highlights package again this morning and again while it was obviously not easy to bat on, if that was the first morning in overcast conditions at the Bullring in white clothes with a red ball against Steyn and Philander and Morkel you would probably just say ‘well good luck for the next few hours’ and sit back and watch on in fascination as batsmen employed the entire crease, left the ball alone a lot, played as late as they could, and tried to get their front pad outside the line of the stumps if possible as much as they could.

Because it’s a t20 game and all the batsman wants to do is walk towards the thing and thrash it, any subtlety is exaggerated tenfold; the idea of self-preservation is almost a last resort, there seems to be a pervading feeling of ‘well why should a batsman have to learn evasive skills or worry about having to play the moving ball or occasionally unexpectedly bouncing one.’

I dunno, I don’t feel like it’s a ‘back in my day’ view, I feel like it’s a pretty acceptable ‘until the ball is pretty obviously just flying into unplayable territory every other delivery, the onus should be on the batsmen to try and find a method’ view

 

[western royboy]

I don’t even think it’s the ‘back in my day’ factor that makes this a bit more than just a straight out ‘hey it’s obviously dangerous’ argument.

It’s the format.

I watched a highlights package again this morning and again while it was obviously not easy to bat on, if that was the first morning in overcast conditions at the Bullring in white clothes with a red ball against Steyn and Philander and Morkel you would probably just say ‘well good luck for the next few hours’ and sit back and watch on in fascination as batsmen employed the entire crease, left the ball alone a lot, played as late as they could, and tried to get their front pad outside the line of the stumps if possible as much as they could.

Because it’s a t20 game and all the batsman wants to do is walk towards the thing and thrash it, any subtlety is exaggerated tenfold; the idea of self-preservation is almost a last resort, there seems to be a pervading feeling of ‘well why should a batsman have to learn evasive skills or worry about having to play the moving ball or occasionally unexpectedly bouncing one.’

I dunno, I don’t feel like it’s a ‘back in my day’ view, I feel like it’s a pretty acceptable ‘until the ball is pretty obviously just flying into unplayable territory every other delivery, the onus should be on the batsmen to try and find a method’ view

No - one section is clearly affected more than the rest - this makes it dangerous / unplayable - 3 FC cricketers on commentary (acknowledging they have to put a positive spin on things) noted concerns from the start - then once it was called off we’re pretty open that it was not fit for play

 

[JackOutback]

CA leaving the door open for the match to be rescheduled which, honestly, I'd prefer to sharing the points. Even if we lost the rescheduled game.

 

[NYRB]

CA leaving the door open for the match to be rescheduled which, honestly, I'd prefer to sharing the points. Even if we lost the rescheduled game.

Renegades come over to Perth on Dec 26th . Make them play a double header on Boxing Day over in Perth.

That seems like the simple solution .