Sport The Hangar Cricket Thread IV

[Pweter]

Also hopefully we'll get a game between South Africa and Pakistan at some point just for the hilarious headlines containing Butt and de Kock.

Or England v SA so there is Butt and Root.

A bloke at the Adelaide test was getting quite annoying during the English 2nd dig continually yelling out "We want Root, we want Root".... had to have a giggle when Johnson beat him all ends up and he yells "oooohhhh, Johnson nearly got himself a Root"

 

[Howard Moon]

You're playing a dangerous game there. This is a series that will be on for young and old, my concern is needing our lower order to bail out our top order when the ball is actually zipping about this time round.

i think he knows that they crack under pressure, thats why he felt the need to mention kirsten working on their mental strength. I reckon there is a slight bogey factor for them when they play us .. only slight but they seem to have funny brain fades or collapses when in winning positions vs us

 

[BrunoV]

just had a big stoush with my south african 'friend' about the upcoming series.... hope i havent put myself in it... transcript;

hmmm have i put myself in it?

can we win the series or not get flogged? im tipping a draw but could have rose coloured glasses.

wonder who this de kock is?

The problem for South Africa is that they play conservatively so they struggle to put us away even when they have a vastly superior team (how did they not beat us 3-0 at the start of 2012/2013 summer?). I do see it being similar to England this summer. If we were to win the toss for the first test I'd send them in. As has been said above, if the right Johnson turns up we could psych them out of the series.

 

[Doss]

Australia was the better side for two of the three tests in the 2012/13 series.

Should have at least been a drawn series. Bloody Faf.

 

[Matthew_Lloyd]

On-field Broad is still a tosser for not walking. Despite saying that, he has shown more balls than almost every one of his teammates this tour and for that, I respect him.

He (along with Prior) saved a guy from taking his life today. Amazing act from both of them. Champions

 

[Kong]

I don't care that Broad didn't walk.

Yeah it's annoying, but most batsmen refuse to walk, especially now that there's a review system (yeah we were out of reviews, but the system has still changed the nature of batsmen).

For every Gilchrist (and he did it, what, twice in his whole career?) there are these guys:

 

[Eleven 38]

Are we still talking about broad not walking, crickeys, the referral system has pretty much ensured no batsmen is ever going to walk again. On top of that the only way its cheating is if he actually paid the umpire not to give him out...

 

[Howard Moon]

true the referral system will ensure no batsman walks again like it ensures no umpire will have the balls to ever make their own decision again

 

[Whispering_Jack]

Broad not walking was made into a bigger deal because it is fun to have a villain! I doubt the people who "hate" Broad actually think he really is a cheat. Australian's just needed someone to hate for the series and this time it was Broad.

 

[BrunoV]

Australia was the better side for two of the three tests in the 2012/13 series.

Should have at least been a drawn series. Bloody Faf.

Australia played better but on paper, prior to the start of the series, would be lucky to have had three players included in the South African team.

 

[BrunoV]

I don't care that Broad didn't walk.

Yeah it's annoying, but most batsmen refuse to walk, especially now that there's a review system (yeah we were out of reviews, but the system has still changed the nature of batsmen).

For every Gilchrist (and he did it, what, twice in his whole career?) there are these guys:

Have next to no time for Gilchrist and his walking. In that Sydney test in 2004 against India he appealed for a caught behind off Dravid where he had the best seat in the house to know that Dravid missed the ball by about an inch. He had dug in big time and that probably cost India the game (or a draw I can't remember).

 

[BrunoV]

Broad not walking was made into a bigger deal because it is fun to have a villain! I doubt the people who "hate" Broad actually think he really is a cheat. Australian's just needed someone to hate for the series and this time it was Broad.

I've done a 180 on Broad in the last 10 tests. The guys is a whole hearted competitor, to go with his immense talent. I've got nothing but respect for him now especially following his shouldering of their here (because Anderson is a flaky so and so).

As for the walking, the size of the snick really doesn't matter. The umpire's decision is all that matters.

 

[Stopher]

It was actually refreshing to see Wade simply admit that he hit it but was not going to walk the other night.

 

[Howard Moon]

is not walking when you know your out cheating? probably no more than heavily appealing any ball that hits a pad to the umpire then not reviewing it...

 

[Kong]

Now if you want to have a healthy hatred of an English cricketer:



I watched that during the 1st test of this Summer, and I suddenly stopped feeling bad for how dismally Anderson went.

 

[Howard Moon]

Now if you want to have a healthy hatred of an English cricketer:



I watched that during the 1st test of this Summer, and I suddenly stopped feeling bad for how dismally Anderson went.

he who chirps last chirps loudest 5 nil 5 nilllllll 5 nil

i guess it puts into more context the big stop and stare Johnson gave ando when he dismissed him in the 2nd test

 

[BrunoV]

is not walking when you know your out cheating? probably no more than heavily appealing any ball that hits a pad to the umpire then not reviewing it...

I reckon the latter is much worse because you're trying to con the umpire into making a decision. With not walking you're simply letting the umpire make up his own mind.

 

[Howard Moon]

I reckon the latter is much worse because you're trying to con the umpire into making a decision. With not walking you're simply letting the umpire make up his own mind.

it becomes worse on those sub contionental pitches when the spinners are on from both ends and they are appealing nearly every ball, you can feel the weight getting worse and worse on the umpires shoulders til they have to give one.

 

[Pweter]

Cricket is a sport where so much rests on the umpires decision (well when DRS is not around) that you should never walk. Ever. You will get given out when you're not at times so why not take the rub of the green when the reverse happens?

When the umps only get 1 chance to view an incident and with that being in real time you know they will make mistakes. You just have to take the good with the bad and it will more or less even out over the journey (save for the dodgy umps on the subcontinent prior to approx 2000). Like AFL, the umps are on a hiding to nothing given the scrutiny from armchair heroes and the media who have the benefit of many replays slowed right down and technology to assist in many different ways.

 

[Howard Moon]

just as a side issue...

re: the annoying habit now of umpires always calling for a front foot check for every wicket because they dont trust their own judgment (i presume)

id be interested to know if they checked every single ball in a day of test cricket... how many actual front foot no balls there would be.

For the small amount of deliveries they check because of a wicket there seems to be a fair amount that get no balled, (maybe one in twenty?) judging by this you would have to assume there would be close to 50 or more no balls not called at the very least? It could have an actual impact on game results

 

[Kong]

On that note, what happens if:

Mitch Johnson gets Cook out, LBW.

Cook reviews the decision, and despite being plumb LBW, DRS picks up on Mitch's front foot no ball.

Does the decision get overturned, even though:

a) Cook was challenging the LBW decision, not asking for a no ball
b) The umpire himself didn't pick up on/request a no ball review

?

 

[Howard Moon]

id assume it gets overturned

hmm but i think i recall a similar precedent being set here?

i cant exaclty recall but there was a review for LBW and it was not witheld but the commentary team had noted it was actually out via hot spot after the event. The comm box were bemoaning the fact that they didint actually check for every type of dismissal.

It may possibly have changed by now (was when drs was new) and they might routinley check front foot, then hawk eye, then hot spot looking for every type of dismissal no matter the appeal?

would be farcical if the spinner bowls, hits the bat/pad area baloons up to short leg.. the players appeal and the ump says, which mode of dismissal are you going for?

 

[BrunoV]

Overturned.

There have been situations where there is an appeal for caught behind when the third umpire also reviews an LBW and vice versa.

 

[DonsRule]

On that note, what happens if:

Mitch Johnson gets Cook out, LBW.

Cook reviews the decision, and despite being plumb LBW, DRS picks up on Mitch's front foot no ball.

Does the decision get overturned, even though:

a) Cook was challenging the LBW decision, not asking for a no ball
b) The umpire himself didn't pick up on/request a no ball review

?

Yep, overturned. The DRS system checked everything in the end.

 

[Old Campaigner]

I think the reviewing team doesn't lose the review when a no ball is discovered.