The repercussions

Page 4 of 6 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Re: The repercussions

Post by *Buckaroo* on Sun 06 Jan 2008, 09:35

tac wrote:
furriner wrote:
Mick Sawyer wrote:"Furry, I think you're being a bit tough on Punter"

I'd agree with tac in this instance furry. You may not have noticed that the grill of his visor smashed into the turf as he landed, after he'd made a terrific effort to turn and lunge. With the adrenalin & a head knock I don't believe he can be slammed as for that appeal.

Mick, this is how I saw it: You have the ball in your hand palm down. The ball touches the ground with some impact. IMVHO, there is no way you cannot sense that contact with the ground has been made. No farking way, including whether you're lunging, twisting etc. I have played enough cricket - at the village idiots level as I keep saying, but a lot of it- to believe this with certainty.

Ponting also had a close catch in the first innings and immediately said not out.

Ponting was right to appeal, it's the umpiring that screwed up again.
avatar
*Buckaroo*


Number of posts : 4771
Reputation : 3
Registration date : 2007-09-06
Flag/Background : wi

View user profile http://exc4cricket.forum-motion.com/index.htm

Back to top Go down

Re: The repercussions

Post by furriner on Sun 06 Jan 2008, 09:36

tac wrote:
furriner wrote:
Mick Sawyer wrote:"Furry, I think you're being a bit tough on Punter"

I'd agree with tac in this instance furry. You may not have noticed that the grill of his visor smashed into the turf as he landed, after he'd made a terrific effort to turn and lunge. With the adrenalin & a head knock I don't believe he can be slammed as for that appeal.

Mick, this is how I saw it: You have the ball in your hand palm down. The ball touches the ground with some impact. IMVHO, there is no way you cannot sense that contact with the ground has been made. No farking way, including whether you're lunging, twisting etc. I have played enough cricket - at the village idiots level as I keep saying, but a lot of it- to believe this with certainty.

Ponting also had a close catch in the first innings and immediately said not out.

Yes tac, I did consider that. But that does not, in my opinion, justify what (I think) he did this time around.
avatar
furriner


Number of posts : 11603
Reputation : 77
Registration date : 2007-09-04
Flag/Background : ind

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: The repercussions

Post by doremi on Sun 06 Jan 2008, 09:36

tac wrote:
doremi wrote:
tac wrote:
furriner wrote:
tac wrote:And I think you are blowing it out of proportion.

I don't.

tac wrote:I just never like to put the worst possible spin on things . . . maybe I wasn't born to be a victim.

I saw what I saw tac.

Yep. But because I'm not so emotional about this sort of thing and prefer to think the best of people, I saw something much different. Let's agree to differ on this one.

cyclops

Pull your pants up, do-boy.

Right after you open that other eye.

Kumble has been quite strong in the press conference after the match.
avatar
doremi


Number of posts : 9742
Age : 28
Reputation : 30
Registration date : 2007-09-03
Flag/Background : ind

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: The repercussions

Post by Mick Sawyer on Sun 06 Jan 2008, 09:37

please don't yell wrote:Well that ones easy to answer, cricket makes billions and yet the umpires aren't that well paid in relation to how much spotlight shines on them.

it's more profitable for ex players to head into other areas.

If we dramatically increase pay rates for all umpiring levels we will see more competition and logically a higher standard.

There's a lot in that. I read today that Bucknor is paid $120k p.a. Wellllll, that's not a shedload. The top 2 or 3 Aussies players (not certain about elsewhere) are paid > $1m p.a. That's a hell of a lot of difference & remember that going to work means leaving the country where your family resides.

Generally the public/ media's expectations around umpires performance standards are far higher than that applied to players & yet the elite umps are paid a fraction of the elite players.

Ya pay peanuts.................
avatar
Mick Sawyer


Number of posts : 7267
Reputation : 21
Registration date : 2007-09-11
Flag/Background : eng

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: The repercussions

Post by doremi on Sun 06 Jan 2008, 09:37

tac wrote:
furriner wrote:
Mick Sawyer wrote:"Furry, I think you're being a bit tough on Punter"

I'd agree with tac in this instance furry. You may not have noticed that the grill of his visor smashed into the turf as he landed, after he'd made a terrific effort to turn and lunge. With the adrenalin & a head knock I don't believe he can be slammed as for that appeal.

Mick, this is how I saw it: You have the ball in your hand palm down. The ball touches the ground with some impact. IMVHO, there is no way you cannot sense that contact with the ground has been made. No farking way, including whether you're lunging, twisting etc. I have played enough cricket - at the village idiots level as I keep saying, but a lot of it- to believe this with certainty.

Ponting also had a close catch in the first innings and immediately said not out.

And when the game looked in the balance, his integrity went right down the toilet.
avatar
doremi


Number of posts : 9742
Age : 28
Reputation : 30
Registration date : 2007-09-03
Flag/Background : ind

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: The repercussions

Post by Mick Sawyer on Sun 06 Jan 2008, 09:39

tac wrote:I think 3 umpires for each test with each umpire only standing for 4 hours a day. Surely, they tire over the 5 days and this would take some pressure off them.

I entirely agree. I see no reason for one of the blokes being paid to sit on the lounge for 5 days.
avatar
Mick Sawyer


Number of posts : 7267
Reputation : 21
Registration date : 2007-09-11
Flag/Background : eng

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: The repercussions

Post by tac on Sun 06 Jan 2008, 09:40

doremi wrote:
tac wrote:
furriner wrote:
Mick Sawyer wrote:"Furry, I think you're being a bit tough on Punter"

I'd agree with tac in this instance furry. You may not have noticed that the grill of his visor smashed into the turf as he landed, after he'd made a terrific effort to turn and lunge. With the adrenalin & a head knock I don't believe he can be slammed as for that appeal.

Mick, this is how I saw it: You have the ball in your hand palm down. The ball touches the ground with some impact. IMVHO, there is no way you cannot sense that contact with the ground has been made. No farking way, including whether you're lunging, twisting etc. I have played enough cricket - at the village idiots level as I keep saying, but a lot of it- to believe this with certainty.

Ponting also had a close catch in the first innings and immediately said not out.

And when the game looked in the balance, his integrity went right down the toilet.

Nonsense. You guys really are clowns. Remember the plumb LBW that was not given to save a test against England last year? Remember the big edge in the ODI in India where your last batsmen managed to scrape a win?

Just a couple of huge decisions off the top of my head. Can't remember too much sooking from you guys on those instances?
avatar
tac


Number of posts : 19270
Reputation : 24
Registration date : 2007-08-31
Flag/Background : pon

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: The repercussions

Post by furriner on Sun 06 Jan 2008, 09:43

tac wrote:Nonsense. You guys really are clowns. Remember the plumb LBW that was not given to save a test against England last year? Remember the big edge in the ODI in India where your last batsmen managed to scrape a win?

Just a couple of huge decisions off the top of my head. Can't remember too much sooking from you guys on those instances?

tac, I think doremi was talking about Ponting's appeal, not the umpiring decisions. A fair comparable would be appeals like this made by an Indian player.
avatar
furriner


Number of posts : 11603
Reputation : 77
Registration date : 2007-09-04
Flag/Background : ind

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: The repercussions

Post by Mick Sawyer on Sun 06 Jan 2008, 09:43

"You have the ball in your hand palm down. The ball touches the ground with some impact. IMVHO, there is no way you cannot sense that contact with the ground has been made"

Furry, you may be right but in this instance I was willing to give him the benefit because he smashed his melon into the ground at the same time which may just have scrambled some of those senses you refered to.
avatar
Mick Sawyer


Number of posts : 7267
Reputation : 21
Registration date : 2007-09-11
Flag/Background : eng

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: The repercussions

Post by doremi on Sun 06 Jan 2008, 09:44

tac wrote:
doremi wrote:
tac wrote:
furriner wrote:
Mick Sawyer wrote:"Furry, I think you're being a bit tough on Punter"

I'd agree with tac in this instance furry. You may not have noticed that the grill of his visor smashed into the turf as he landed, after he'd made a terrific effort to turn and lunge. With the adrenalin & a head knock I don't believe he can be slammed as for that appeal.

Mick, this is how I saw it: You have the ball in your hand palm down. The ball touches the ground with some impact. IMVHO, there is no way you cannot sense that contact with the ground has been made. No farking way, including whether you're lunging, twisting etc. I have played enough cricket - at the village idiots level as I keep saying, but a lot of it- to believe this with certainty.

Ponting also had a close catch in the first innings and immediately said not out.

And when the game looked in the balance, his integrity went right down the toilet.

Nonsense. You guys really are clowns. Remember the plumb LBW that was not given to save a test against England last year? Remember the big edge in the ODI in India where your last batsmen managed to scrape a win?

Just a couple of huge decisions off the top of my head. Can't remember too much sooking from you guys on those instances?

Pull your head out of your backside. If you can't see the difference between dubious umpiring decisions and blatant cheating by claiming a catch you grounded, you're seriously not worth arguing with right now.
avatar
doremi


Number of posts : 9742
Age : 28
Reputation : 30
Registration date : 2007-09-03
Flag/Background : ind

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: The repercussions

Post by furriner on Sun 06 Jan 2008, 09:45

Mick Sawyer wrote:"You have the ball in your hand palm down. The ball touches the ground with some impact. IMVHO, there is no way you cannot sense that contact with the ground has been made"

Furry, you may be right but in this instance I was willing to give him the benefit because he smashed his melon into the ground at the same time which may just have scrambled some of those senses you refered to.

OK Mick, we agree to disagree then mate.

Besides which, Pontings's brains, if not his senses, were scrambled to begin with that being his natural state.
avatar
furriner


Number of posts : 11603
Reputation : 77
Registration date : 2007-09-04
Flag/Background : ind

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: The repercussions

Post by *Buckaroo* on Sun 06 Jan 2008, 09:46

doremi wrote:
tac wrote:
furriner wrote:
Mick Sawyer wrote:"Furry, I think you're being a bit tough on Punter"

I'd agree with tac in this instance furry. You may not have noticed that the grill of his visor smashed into the turf as he landed, after he'd made a terrific effort to turn and lunge. With the adrenalin & a head knock I don't believe he can be slammed as for that appeal.

Mick, this is how I saw it: You have the ball in your hand palm down. The ball touches the ground with some impact. IMVHO, there is no way you cannot sense that contact with the ground has been made. No farking way, including whether you're lunging, twisting etc. I have played enough cricket - at the village idiots level as I keep saying, but a lot of it- to believe this with certainty.

Ponting also had a close catch in the first innings and immediately said not out.

And when the game looked in the balance, his integrity went right down the toilet.


yeah, you could say that he conserved his goodwill and used it up when his team was in a tight spot. He's got the right to appeal, but its the umpire who has in the previous innings been very methodical in referring all contentius decisions to the third umpire suddenly has a mind of his own and a very strong opinion on what should be given out that is bought into question.

Basically one can question the integrity of such umpires.
avatar
*Buckaroo*


Number of posts : 4771
Reputation : 3
Registration date : 2007-09-06
Flag/Background : wi

View user profile http://exc4cricket.forum-motion.com/index.htm

Back to top Go down

Re: The repercussions

Post by skully on Sun 06 Jan 2008, 09:46

I remember a lot of debate about the caught-and-bowled Bung took off Strauss in T1 of the 2005 Ashes. He clearly caught the ball on the dive, controlled it then as he hit the turf, he turned his hands down to break his fall and skidded along on top of the ball. I'm not going to get into an argument with anyone but I thought Punter's looked a lot the same (caught the ball palm up then turned his hand over), and as replays showed, the ball had flicked Dhoni's little finger as it bounced up off his pad. Just a tad harsh to question Punter's integrity in this instance IMHO. What does the law actually say about a catch?
avatar
skully


Number of posts : 90242
Age : 105
Reputation : 199
Registration date : 2007-08-31
Flag/Background : baggy

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: The repercussions

Post by please don't yell on Sun 06 Jan 2008, 09:48

Mick Sawyer wrote:

There's a lot in that. I read today that Bucknor is paid $120k p.a. Wellllll, that's not a shedload. The top 2 or 3 Aussies players (not certain about elsewhere) are paid > $1m p.a. That's a hell of a lot of difference & remember that going to work means leaving the country where your family resides.


Bigger issue is what first class and lower grade umps are paid(or not paid) around the world, how many of these umps could have been world class but had to quit to get a more profitable job?

We simply don't know how many potential simon taufel's are now working 9-5 jobs as a result of poor first class pay packets.

please don't yell


Number of posts : 1138
Reputation : 0
Registration date : 2007-09-06
Flag/Background : eng

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: The repercussions

Post by doctorspin on Sun 06 Jan 2008, 10:03

skully wrote:I remember a lot of debate about the caught-and-bowled Bung took off Strauss in T1 of the 2005 Ashes. He clearly caught the ball on the dive, controlled it then as he hit the turf, he turned his hands down to break his fall and skidded along on top of the ball. I'm not going to get into an argument with anyone but I thought Punter's looked a lot the same (caught the ball palm up then turned his hand over), and as replays showed, the ball had flicked Dhoni's little finger as it bounced up off his pad. Just a tad harsh to question Punter's integrity in this instance IMHO. What does the law actually say about a catch?
Harris did exactly the same yesterday, a brilliant diving catch in the deep, but turned his hand palm down to break his fall and ran the ball along the ground. He was holding it tightly so you could argue he had it under control, but all commentators and pundits said it should have been not out.

It is the same as catching a ball on the boundary and then running over the boundary line.. You could argue the catch is controlled, but the rule seems to be that the body has to be under control as well.
avatar
doctorspin



Number of posts : 2746
Reputation : 8
Registration date : 2007-08-31
Flag/Background : eng

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: The repercussions

Post by tac on Sun 06 Jan 2008, 10:05

doremi wrote:
tac wrote:
doremi wrote:
tac wrote:
furriner wrote:
Mick Sawyer wrote:"Furry, I think you're being a bit tough on Punter"

I'd agree with tac in this instance furry. You may not have noticed that the grill of his visor smashed into the turf as he landed, after he'd made a terrific effort to turn and lunge. With the adrenalin & a head knock I don't believe he can be slammed as for that appeal.

Mick, this is how I saw it: You have the ball in your hand palm down. The ball touches the ground with some impact. IMVHO, there is no way you cannot sense that contact with the ground has been made. No farking way, including whether you're lunging, twisting etc. I have played enough cricket - at the village idiots level as I keep saying, but a lot of it- to believe this with certainty.

Ponting also had a close catch in the first innings and immediately said not out.

And when the game looked in the balance, his integrity went right down the toilet.

Nonsense. You guys really are clowns. Remember the plumb LBW that was not given to save a test against England last year? Remember the big edge in the ODI in India where your last batsmen managed to scrape a win?

Just a couple of huge decisions off the top of my head. Can't remember too much sooking from you guys on those instances?

Pull your head out of your backside. If you can't see the difference between dubious umpiring decisions and blatant cheating by claiming a catch you grounded, you're seriously not worth arguing with right now.

My bad, do-boy . . . that post was meant to be on a different thread in response to a different poster.
avatar
tac


Number of posts : 19270
Reputation : 24
Registration date : 2007-08-31
Flag/Background : pon

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: The repercussions

Post by doremi on Sun 06 Jan 2008, 10:07

doctorspin wrote:
skully wrote:I remember a lot of debate about the caught-and-bowled Bung took off Strauss in T1 of the 2005 Ashes. He clearly caught the ball on the dive, controlled it then as he hit the turf, he turned his hands down to break his fall and skidded along on top of the ball. I'm not going to get into an argument with anyone but I thought Punter's looked a lot the same (caught the ball palm up then turned his hand over), and as replays showed, the ball had flicked Dhoni's little finger as it bounced up off his pad. Just a tad harsh to question Punter's integrity in this instance IMHO. What does the law actually say about a catch?
Harris did exactly the same yesterday, a brilliant diving catch in the deep, but turned his hand palm down to break his fall and ran the ball along the ground. He was holding it tightly so you could argue he had it under control, but all commentators and pundits said it should have been not out.

It is the same as catching a ball on the boundary and then running over the boundary line.. You could argue the catch is controlled, but the rule seems to be that the body has to be under control as well.

If you are in control, you always dive with the ball palm up.
avatar
doremi


Number of posts : 9742
Age : 28
Reputation : 30
Registration date : 2007-09-03
Flag/Background : ind

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: The repercussions

Post by *Buckaroo* on Sun 06 Jan 2008, 10:08

BCCI being run by a bunch of spineless lowlife crooks is one of the reasons for Bucknor appearing in every test involving the Indians and indulging in blatant discrimination. Dalmiya atleast had the anglo-Aus lobby in ICC under his control. Things wouldn't have gone as berserk and blatant as they were today if he ran BCCI.

you don't expect Mr. Pawar, honorable agricultural minister to do anything? he looks too sluggish to wear his own pants properly.
avatar
*Buckaroo*


Number of posts : 4771
Reputation : 3
Registration date : 2007-09-06
Flag/Background : wi

View user profile http://exc4cricket.forum-motion.com/index.htm

Back to top Go down

Re: The repercussions

Post by skully on Sun 06 Jan 2008, 10:14

*Buckaroo* wrote:you don't expect Mr. Pawar, honorable agricultural minister to do anything? he looks too sluggish to wear his own pants properly.
Laughing Laughing Laughing
avatar
skully


Number of posts : 90242
Age : 105
Reputation : 199
Registration date : 2007-08-31
Flag/Background : baggy

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: The repercussions

Post by skully on Sun 06 Jan 2008, 10:17

Anywho, back to the topic. Surely Seaweed has to come in for Jaffer. And Yuvraj must be on thin ice. And what will be the make-up of the 4 bowler Indian attack? Does Pathan come in, or does Bhajji still partner Jumbo in a two-pronged spin attack?

From an Aussie perspective I'd have Spud in for Midge but I suspect the Banjo lefty may survive, with Hogggyyy!!! carrying the drinks.
avatar
skully


Number of posts : 90242
Age : 105
Reputation : 199
Registration date : 2007-08-31
Flag/Background : baggy

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: The repercussions

Post by *Buckaroo* on Sun 06 Jan 2008, 10:18

Well

Pathan/Pankaj come in for Yuvraj. More likely the former.

And Sehwag comes in for Jaffa.
avatar
*Buckaroo*


Number of posts : 4771
Reputation : 3
Registration date : 2007-09-06
Flag/Background : wi

View user profile http://exc4cricket.forum-motion.com/index.htm

Back to top Go down

Re: The repercussions

Post by Basil on Sun 06 Jan 2008, 10:21

skully wrote:Anywho, back to the topic. Surely Seaweed has to come in for Jaffer. And Yuvraj must be on thin ice. And what will be the make-up of the 4 bowler Indian attack? Does Pathan come in, or does Bhajji still partner Jumbo in a two-pronged spin attack?

From an Aussie perspective I'd have Spud in for Midge but I suspect the Banjo lefty may survive, with Hogggyyy!!! carrying the drinks.

Sehwag batting at the WACA? - I would pay good money to watch that. If Hoggard could inconvenience him with throat balls in India, I shudder to think what he will make of the Aussie fast bowling.
avatar
Basil


Number of posts : 14954
Age : 58
Reputation : 51
Registration date : 2007-09-03
Flag/Background : eng

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: The repercussions

Post by skully on Sun 06 Jan 2008, 10:23

Basil wrote:
skully wrote:Anywho, back to the topic. Surely Seaweed has to come in for Jaffer. And Yuvraj must be on thin ice. And what will be the make-up of the 4 bowler Indian attack? Does Pathan come in, or does Bhajji still partner Jumbo in a two-pronged spin attack?

From an Aussie perspective I'd have Spud in for Midge but I suspect the Banjo lefty may survive, with Hogggyyy!!! carrying the drinks.

Sehwag batting at the WACA? - I would pay good money to watch that. If Hoggard could inconvenience him with throat balls in India, I shudder to think what he will make of the Aussie fast bowling.
A fair call Bas, but Jaffer is clueless at the moment. Sehwag couldn't be any worse. And he goes hard at the ball, so may squirt plenty over the slips.
avatar
skully


Number of posts : 90242
Age : 105
Reputation : 199
Registration date : 2007-08-31
Flag/Background : baggy

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: The repercussions

Post by *Buckaroo* on Sun 06 Jan 2008, 10:25

there is also this possibility that one could see an entirely new opener like Pathan/Dhoni/Karthik.


Sehwag's inclusion depends upon how he performs against Canberra side.
avatar
*Buckaroo*


Number of posts : 4771
Reputation : 3
Registration date : 2007-09-06
Flag/Background : wi

View user profile http://exc4cricket.forum-motion.com/index.htm

Back to top Go down

Re: The repercussions

Post by tac on Sun 06 Jan 2008, 10:26

skully wrote:
Basil wrote:
skully wrote:Anywho, back to the topic. Surely Seaweed has to come in for Jaffer. And Yuvraj must be on thin ice. And what will be the make-up of the 4 bowler Indian attack? Does Pathan come in, or does Bhajji still partner Jumbo in a two-pronged spin attack?

From an Aussie perspective I'd have Spud in for Midge but I suspect the Banjo lefty may survive, with Hogggyyy!!! carrying the drinks.

Sehwag batting at the WACA? - I would pay good money to watch that. If Hoggard could inconvenience him with throat balls in India, I shudder to think what he will make of the Aussie fast bowling.
A fair call Bas, but Jaffer is clueless at the moment. Sehwag couldn't be any worse. And he goes hard at the ball, so may squirt plenty over the slips.

I had a girlfriend who squirted over her slips a lot . . . you can see pics here www.squirtalot.com
avatar
tac


Number of posts : 19270
Reputation : 24
Registration date : 2007-08-31
Flag/Background : pon

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: The repercussions

Post by Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

Page 4 of 6 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

View previous topic View next topic Back to top

- Similar topics

 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum