England v Australia, 3rd Test, Old Trafford, 1-5 August, 2013

Huzzah. Courtesy of my ridiculous rising time of 4.45 am, I hit the hay at Lunch (pretty disgusted at the idiot DRS decision by Dharma-no-seen-a) so got up this morning hoping for a decent showing. I think 3-303 fits the bill.

Have seen a snippet of highlights. Bucky will be filthy that he missed a half volley to go lbw and miss a chance at 100 after a fine knock. Smith dodged (possibly justice) numerous bullets after England had no reviews left, and Clarke looked classy.

While I am not so silly to claim anything ridiculous like being back in the series, if we can push on to a high 400 total or better, then we should at least ensure a draw and remove any chance of this side taking the record run of defeats record for Aus.

Aus obviously has the best batting conditions so need to make the most of it, and hope that our bowlers can make some inroads. But, with some dodgy Mancunian weather in the offing, a draw looks the best bet ATM.

MoH wrote:

Henry wrote:

MoH wrote:

Henry wrote:Was MoH one of the numerous IDs Rich used on C4?

No this is John. I finally had enough of the idiotic comments below cricinfo articles and wanted some intelligent cricket discussion. When I couldn't find that, I signed up here.

Happens here occasionally.....

I suppose that's a possibility given that Invader Zim no longer appears to be posting.

 

welcome back MoH.

OP Tipping wrote:
"Jimmy trying too hard for the McGarnagle, the Clinton and the Scented Panda Hammer?"


lolwot?

OP, read the 12th post on this page of Forum Gold. It's a classic post sent by Dello to Cricinfo, that was lauded and posted online by the Cricinfo "commentator at the time.

Man of Hereford?

Dello wrote:

doctorspin wrote:

beamer wrote:No reviews left for England though, that's likely to be costly, when we're denied a plumb lbw to break the inevitable 150-run last wicket partnership.

`Just happened, Smith PLUMB!

Tony Hill is the new Russell Tiffin.

Two shockers in a day. Well played.

Agreed. Very poor.

Khawaja has bo reason to complain about the umpiring ... irrelevant ... as soon as Trev embiggened him, he was screwed.

Just checked the scorecard. With Smith coming in at 3-129, and rubbish to follow, England must've felt like they had us on toast again. Smith's couple of reprieves at the hands of blind umpires certainly played a big part. If Smith went early, then Warner struts to the wicket, and the Poms would've been confident of ripping through the rest.

Saw the lbw to Swan that Smith survived early. There was a millimetre in it in Smith's favour. Looked plumb, but Hill thought otherwise.  Cost England a review that later proved pivotal.

Perhaps he just felt guilty about the other one. Perhaps he just 'takes turns' with aye and nay when he doesn't know.

It all seems a bit random, and you wouldn't want your career to be in Mr Hill's hands.

I find myself barracking a bit for Warner tonight. If he gets runs on the back of Smith's, then it becomes a contest in two between Koaja and Con. Boof clearly seems to be leaning towards UK, so at last we might see a glimmer of hope that Fuse's career is over.

lardbucket wrote:It all seems a bit random, and you wouldn't want your career to be in Mr Hill's hands.

Aye, nowhere near the firm consistency of Erasmus. It's scary how crap the umpiring has been recently.

It would be nice if DRS umpire could be given a "please explain" note.

OP Tipping wrote:It would be nice if DRS umpire could be given a "please explain" note.

Was thinking the same thing this morning.

I wonder if he got spooked after the overturning of the Trott not out in the first test and the outcry over that.

It's worth remembering the third umpire doesn't actually make the final decision on whether it's out or not out.

He simply relays information back to the on-field umpire eg.
"Was there a hotspot?"
- "No."

The on-field umpire then takes all of this new information into account and decides whether it's enough to overturn his original decision.

I'd say the Khawaja decision was a Cool Hand Luke job - "What we have here is failure to communicate."

Saw numerous replays of UK's "dismissal" this morning, and it is simply mind boggling that Dharmasena didn't overturn it. The very first replay clearly showed that he missed the ball by a good margin. There was no hot spot, and the only noise was his bat hitting his back pad way before the ball passing the bat. Just a dreadful decision, when replay, hot spot, and noise all said "not out".

He later made a decision to uphold an Erasmus not out for a caught behind off Smith (England's last review). The ball was much closer to Smith's edge, but the noise appeared to come after the ball passed the bat (later confirmed by Snicko). On first replay, it looked out, but the analysis seemed to prove otherwise.

Why not take the South African approach to the DRS controversies and not comment? One side saying decisions doing rimjobs and the other shooting off letters to the ICC. Don't think it's a coincidence that in the two series where DRS and the umpires have been under most scrutiny has it come up with the most controversial decisions, when India toured and now.

skully wrote:I find myself barracking a bit for Warner tonight. If he gets runs on the back of Smith's, then it becomes a contest in two between Koaja and Con. Boof clearly seems to be leaning towards UK, so at last we might see a glimmer of hope that Fuse's career is over.

Except Hughes has been the better of two on current ability.

Boof favouriting his converted Banjo

tricycle wrote:Why not take the South African approach to the DRS controversies and not comment? One side saying decisions doing rimjobs and the other shooting off letters to the ICC. Don't think it's a coincidence that in the two series where DRS and the umpires have been under most scrutiny has it come up with the most controversial decisions, when India toured and now.

Was talking to my cricket loving little bro this morning, and after chatting about the ongoing "misuse" of the DRS i.e. it's there to eradicate the howler (not to give an unwarranted reprieve), we thought the best approach might be to flick DRS altogether.

Retain 3rd umpires for run outs, stumpings, no balls and contentious catches etc, but do away with the referral system. The 3rd Umpire then has it within his powers to overrule on any howlers. His time limit is until the "dismissed" batsmen leaves the field. He still has all the existing technology available to him. If he calls the on-ground ump before the out player leaves the field of player with a reversal, he survives. I reckon 99% of batsmen know when they are not out, or close to not out. AS he straggles off dejectedly and obviously in disagreement, the 3rd ump has the 2 minutes or so to review. It could eradicate howlers AND stop the misuse of the referral by dicks like Twatson, who do it in hope rather than gut feel of not being out.

Wasn't thinking about these posts, just the two boards. Shit decisions have been made in the past too, but it's been exception till the boards start weighing in.

baggygreen wrote:Boof favouriting his converted Banjo

 

It would take Watto 6 months to leave the field in the hope he would get a reprieve

That sounds like the system they used last year in the Ryobi (and/or Big Bash) ...not perfect but OK

I think Sam Whiteman (or another debutant Wozzie batsman) got a howler and was so disappointed he was off the field before they could call him back so the "out" couldnt be overturned ...it led to some very slow walks off the field

skully wrote:

baggygreen wrote:Boof favouriting his converted Banjo

 

UKoaja

But doesn't the next batsman have to be out on the field within two minutes or he will be timed out?

Sorry. Three minutes.

http://www.lords.org/mcc/laws-of-cricket/laws/law-31-timed-out-1/

Getting on the plane in a few minutes so will miss the whole second day unless I can find some wifi in Singapore airport.

Flly expect to go through immigration at Manchester with the officer telling me about Swann's 9 for including a hatrick and Cook's ton in reply.