Remove this Banner Ad

The Cricket Thread

  • Thread starter Thread starter eldorado
  • Start date Start date
  • Tagged users Tagged users None

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

I like Starc when he goes for the jugular. Looks like taking a wicket all the time. Hope he realises that he needs to do it 100% of the time when bowling. If he can only sustain it for 3 overs at a time then so be it. Wish he would pitch a bit more full though and temp the batsman to drive. If he gets the mix right his speed should upset the batsmans footwork.
 
grumbleguts said:
There is nothing wrong with altering the stance.
a) he didn't swap hands so still left handed.
b) if you can do it, you should be able to. Tip for bowlers, change the speed of your deliveries occasionally so as not to be premeditated.
c) of course you can change feet. Geeze what do you think Hayden was doing when he walked down the pitch at fast bowlers. Every alternate step is swapping stance.

the issue is what happens to the LBW law. If the ball pitches outside square leg, the batsman can't be given out LBW.
well, by swapping feet, you have a different leg side. Which is which?

So in my mind, let them play the shot, but they forfeit the right to the "pitching outside leg stump" rule. LBW effectively becomes similar to the not playing a shot rules.

That's all that needs to happen.
Click to expand...

Thanks for your opinion, but opinions seem to be all I ever get with this one. A mate of mine is a former Test umpire and even he doesn't know the answer. Can't wait for someone to switch, then get hit in line after the pitches outside leg. Technically it becomes outside off, but as usual, we will need the controversy first before a decision is made.
 
Adelaide Hawk said:
Thanks for your opinion, but opinions seem to be all I ever get with this one. A mate of mine is a former Test umpire and even he doesn't know the answer. Can't wait for someone to switch, then get hit in line after the pitches outside leg. Technically it becomes outside off, but as usual, we will need the controversy first before a decision is made.
Click to expand...
clearly it's an opinion because the law doesn't cater to this particular curiosity.

But the alteration of the lbw law, where the batsman forfeits his leg stump at least keeps the game in tact, allows them to play the shot and gives the bowlers something extra as payment.
 
grumbleguts said:
clearly it's an opinion because the law doesn't cater to this particular curiosity.

But the alteration of the lbw law, where the batsman forfeits his leg stump at least keeps the game in tact, allows them to play the shot and gives the bowlers something extra as payment.
Click to expand...

Yep, and as I said, it WILL happen one day, and nobody will know what the correct umpiring decision should be. Time to address it now, not wait unti a controversy boils over.
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

Adelaide Hawk said:
Yep, and as I said, it WILL happen one day, and nobody will know what the correct umpiring decision should be. Time to address it now, not wait unti a controversy boils over.
Click to expand...
The shot itself seems like an unnecessary risk. If you want to take it, good luck. As far as the leg stump question, my opinion is that the action of the ball pitching should determine the relative leg stump. That way the fundamentals of the leg stump rule aren't tinkered with, it's just refining the framework in which it's applied. As you say, needs to be done as a matter of urgency before we have a farcical situation.

As for Smith, he's just become a magnificent player.
 
Adelaide Hawk said:
Yep, and as I said, it WILL happen one day, and nobody will know what the correct umpiring decision should be. Time to address it now, not wait unti a controversy boils over.
Click to expand...

Yes, My suggestion is they change the rule immediately and see how it affects the game. Don't wait until someone swaps feet and an LBW appeal occurs.

On another note: if shane warne continues commentating I am going to have to ask him to leave my loungeroom.

If he calls the ball a cherry one more time, or mentions a julio again I'll scream.
 
Well, I'm not watching the Test because I'm at work. I think this would be the first time EVER that I'm happier being at work than watching cricket. Sounds like a dreadful bore. I was going to take tomorrow off to watch the cricket, but I don't think I will now.

I said this last time India were here .... and before anyone challenges this, I'm not blaming just India here, we are every bit as much to blame ..... but I don't want to see an Australia v India Test series again. Both sides just bring the worst out of each other. If they concentrated more on just playing cricket instead of devising new ways to get under each others' skin, they'd be better served.

Some of these bowlers, bowling crap and mouth going at a million miles per hour .... just go back and bowl the next ball FFS.
 
Good artcile by Ed Cowan on Cricinfo:

"How I broke my game and then fixed it again"

I recently stumbled upon a short but wonderful five-minute video on a camouflaging octopus. Its climax featured it changing its colour and texture to make it look like the surrounding coral.


It provoked thoughts about my own evolution and the impact our environment has on our behaviours. Slowly I started to piece the narrative of my cricket growth together. More specifically, how my own batting had changed and shifted, sometimes subconsciously, other times deliberately, to adapt to various conditions around the country and the world. I realised that what I occasionally thought was right was, in fact, inhibiting my game. Imagine the octopus camouflaged as coral in the middle of the Sahara.

http://www.espncricinfo.com/magazine/content/story/816003.html
 
If you have a terminal disease, and someone famous doesn't have your disease, you're going to die. If someone famous has your disease or has had it, they organise massive pretty coloured fund raisers to make sure they find a cure.

I spent many years researchinhg psoriasis until I ran out of funding, because my wife has it. (It's not terminal but she has it on 80% of her body and spends her entire life in pain, and never leaves the house.)

However, there is no funding for psoriasis because there are no famous people with it.

This is in no way meant to be a negative towards the JM foundation but more a commentary on how people see and fund disease research.
 
Adelaide Hawk said:
Well, I'm not watching the Test because I'm at work. I think this would be the first time EVER that I'm happier being at work than watching cricket. Sounds like a dreadful bore. I was going to take tomorrow off to watch the cricket, but I don't think I will now.

I said this last time India were here .... and before anyone challenges this, I'm not blaming just India here, we are every bit as much to blame ..... but I don't want to see an Australia v India Test series again. Both sides just bring the worst out of each other. If they concentrated more on just playing cricket instead of devising new ways to get under each others' skin, they'd be better served.

Some of these bowlers, bowling crap and mouth going at a million miles per hour .... just go back and bowl the next ball FFS.
Click to expand...

I do like watching the Indians bat though. Flat, flat pitch with not much interest from either team in the field.
 
grumbleguts said:
If you have a terminal disease, and someone famous doesn't have your disease, you're going to die. If someone famous has your disease or has had it, they organise massive pretty coloured fund raisers to make sure they find a cure.

I spent many years researchinhg psoriasis until I ran out of funding, because my wife has it. (It's not terminal but she has it on 80% of her body and spends her entire life in pain, and never leaves the house.)

However, there is no funding for psoriasis because there are no famous people with it.

This is in no way meant to be a negative towards the JM foundation but more a commentary on how people see and fund disease research.
Click to expand...

I think I understand where you're coming from. Breast Cancer research has done wonderfully well out of the JM Foundation and the Sydney Test, how fortunate were they that the wife of a great cricketer contracted the disease. I was thinking similar thoughts this year that why does this get such amazing support year in, year out, when other charities are left to fend for themselves?

Breast cancer also has other sporting celebrities such as Shane Crawford raising squillions for the cause. I really think some other foundations should have similar opportunities in coming Sydney Tests, or other Tests for that matter. Why should one charity continue to scoop the pool?

Like yourself, this is not an attempt to discredit the JM Foundation, but more an attempt to raise public awareness of other like charities.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Adelaide Hawk said:
Certainly more fun than watching young Australian batsmen these days, some of whom should count their lucky stars for the flat lifeless wickets in this series, as well as purile Indian pace bowling.
Click to expand...

I can just appreciated the batsmanship. They seem more all-rounded in general.
 
grizzlym said:
I can just appreciated the batsmanship. They seem more all-rounded in general.
Click to expand...

I tend to agree, but just remember, we only see them in conditions that suit them. I just wonder how well they'd go on a 70s style Perth deck with Lillee and Thomson letting them have it.
 
grumbleguts said:
If you have a terminal disease, and someone famous doesn't have your disease, you're going to die. If someone famous has your disease or has had it, they organise massive pretty coloured fund raisers to make sure they find a cure.

I spent many years researchinhg psoriasis until I ran out of funding, because my wife has it. (It's not terminal but she has it on 80% of her body and spends her entire life in pain, and never leaves the house.)

However, there is no funding for psoriasis because there are no famous people with it.

This is in no way meant to be a negative towards the JM foundation but more a commentary on how people see and fund disease research.
Click to expand...

Pardon my ignorance, but are there any charitable foundations raising funds for research into psoriasis? If so, you may want to steer their leader/CEO to the Hawks. The Hawks support several charities and may support this one also.
 
Adelaide Hawk said:
I tend to agree, but just remember, we only see them in conditions that suit them. I just wonder how well they'd go on a 70s style Perth deck with Lillee and Thomson letting them have it.
Click to expand...

Oh, I'm not saying they're superior or could cope with more hostile conditions - I just like seeing the batsmanship they exhibit under these conditions.
 
These chanel nine commentators are morons. That last wicket to lyon clearly showed the last thing the ball hit before the fielder's hands was the bat. Yet they just keep carrying on because the initial commentary was to say not out. Move on boys you were wrong.
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

I wanted to ask the commentators in the first test (which of the mitches pitches the six stitches on the pitches with the least glitches.
 
James Pattinson is a stupid immature little minded tool. His hyperprivileged petulance on display tonight makes me hope he never ever wears an australian top ever again.
 
grumbleguts said:
James Pattinson is a stupid immature little minded tool. His hyperprivileged petulance on display tonight makes me hope he never ever wears an australian top ever again.
Click to expand...
He hasn't been good tonight in that respect, but he is definitely a future fast bowler for our test side, not to mention in ODI cricket.
 
grumbleguts said:
He told the umpire to fudge off for calling a clear wide.
Click to expand...
And none of our Hawks players have said the same thing regarding a clear free kick, or other test bowlers when they feel a wicket has been denied?
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top Bottom