BBL Match 37 Brisbane Heat v Sydney Sixers @ the Gabba Wed 5 Jan 2035 ACDT *now playing Weds 19 Jan*

Who will win?

  • Hobart

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Sydney

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    0
  • Poll closed .

Remove this Banner Ad

NYRB

Brownlow Medallist
Oct 6, 2011
13,899
5,333
Auckland, New Zealand
AFL Club
GWS
Other Teams
Patriots, Golden State, Wildcats
92-2 after 10 for the Sixers, Brisbane probably try to go for the win with nothing to play for at best. BPP means nothing to Brisbane now
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Aussie_boy

Brownlow Medallist
Dec 21, 2012
16,260
12,659
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
Chelsea, Redbacks, Adelaide United
Lynn could've been out about 5 times in that innings
 

Belnakor

Brownlow Medallist
Apr 10, 2005
23,540
15,044
Perth
AFL Club
Fremantle
I think has been out like 5 times in identical fashion this bbl lol

Time for the glue factory I reckon.
 

Aussie_boy

Brownlow Medallist
Dec 21, 2012
16,260
12,659
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
Chelsea, Redbacks, Adelaide United
Considering this is basically their full strength team, that is a very ordinary Heat team
 

Aussie_boy

Brownlow Medallist
Dec 21, 2012
16,260
12,659
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
Chelsea, Redbacks, Adelaide United
Did I see Neser is batting at 7? Lol.

Lehmann is a cretin not sure how he is still coach.

Neser at 7 is the least of their issues. A middle order of Duckett, Heazlett and Peirson shouldn't fill anyone with much confidence. Very average bowling attack too.

Lehmann is only the assistant these days
 

NYRB

Brownlow Medallist
Oct 6, 2011
13,899
5,333
Auckland, New Zealand
AFL Club
GWS
Other Teams
Patriots, Golden State, Wildcats
Typical streaky Lynn innings so far.



Hard to understand why Bartlett isn't in the Heat's first choice team, I'd pick him ahead of Bazley too.



Disappointing news, that's the third time this series has been postponed, I wouldn't be surprised if the same thing happens next summer too.
blame Seccombe and Lehmann- team selection has been wrong and tactics have been strange to say the least
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Belnakor

Brownlow Medallist
Apr 10, 2005
23,540
15,044
Perth
AFL Club
Fremantle
Another pathetic batting effort from the Heat. hard to know who's worse, them or the Renegades.

The renegades are more disappointing because their list isn’t the worst. The heat comfortably have the worst list in the competition.
 

ptrg

Brownlow Medallist
Mar 19, 2008
11,401
9,315
FNQ (get me outta here)
AFL Club
Melbourne
Anyone have a link of the actual rule about two full toss no balls?
I didn’t think the u pores had a discretion for whether a fast bowler’s delivery was “dangerous” or not.

The umpires ruled that the first one wasn’t “dangerous” despite it being an on-pace above waist, called no ball.

Pretty sure earlier in the tournament another bowler was removed from the attack, and the commentators confirmed there’s no discretion, if you bowl 2 full toss no balls, you’re out of the attack (they wouldn’t be deemed no balls if they were slow/non-dangerous)
 

Aussie_boy

Brownlow Medallist
Dec 21, 2012
16,260
12,659
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
Chelsea, Redbacks, Adelaide United
How the hell was that not a wide
 

corbies

Moderator
Jul 31, 2010
7,120
9,525
AFL Club
Sydney
Other Teams
S'roos, New Jets, WHam, Cronulla
Anyone have a link of the actual rule about two full toss no balls?
I didn’t think the u pores had a discretion for whether a fast bowler’s delivery was “dangerous” or not.

The umpires ruled that the first one wasn’t “dangerous” despite it being an on-pace above waist, called no ball.

Pretty sure earlier in the tournament another bowler was removed from the attack, and the commentators confirmed there’s no discretion, if you bowl 2 full toss no balls, you’re out of the attack (they wouldn’t be deemed no balls if they were slow/non-dangerous)
The commentators earlier in the tournament have nfi what they are talking about then. It changed approximately 3 years ago to allow umpires to be subjective of which over the waist no balls would be warned:

From Law 41.7:

41.7 Bowling of dangerous and unfair non-pitching deliveries

41.7.1
Any delivery, which passes or would have passed, without pitching, above waist height of the striker standing upright at the popping crease, is unfair. Whenever such a delivery is bowled, the umpire shall call and signal No ball.

41.7.2 The bowling of a delivery as defined in 41.7.1 is also dangerous if the bowler’s end umpire considers that there is a risk of injury to the striker. In making that judgement the umpire shall:

  • disregard any protective equipment worn by the striker
  • be mindful of:
    • the speed, height and direction of the delivery
    • the skill of the striker
    • the repeated nature of such deliveries.
41.7.3 If the umpire considers a non-pitching delivery, or a series of non-pitching deliveries, to be dangerous under 41.7.2, when the ball is dead, the umpire shall repeat the No ball signal to the scorers and then caution the bowler, indicating that this is a first and final warning. The umpire shall also inform the other umpire, the captain of the fielding side and the batters of what has occurred. This caution shall apply to that bowler throughout the innings.

41.7.4 Should there be any further dangerous such delivery by the same bowler in that innings, the umpire shall

  • call and signal No ball
  • when the ball is dead, direct the captain of the fielding side to suspend the bowler immediately from bowling
  • inform the other umpire for the reason for this action.
The bowler thus suspended shall not be allowed to bowl again in that innings.

The laws of cricket are easily found via google so there's no excuse other than laziness for someone who is paid to commentate on cricket not knowing them.