Just watched a full replay of the Indian 2nd dig

Mick Sawyer wrote:What about the fact that this shot is just a fraction of a second after his face (grill on the visor) smashed into the ground. With the point made earlier WRT him disclaiming the 1/171 opportunity, why's it so hard to believe that this was an honest error?

The shot before says the same thing. As for the declaiming thing, others have suggested reasons I will not get into because they will be conjecture. But how about the fact that Kumble has been a much admired sportsman in Australia for years, for the way he plays the game. Why is it so hard to believe him?

Zat wrote:

Mick Sawyer wrote:This is a great illustration of why it's so bloody hard to find "good" umpires. Those that sit it judgement & rate their performances have nfi how freaking difficult the jpb is..

Well, chennel Nein spent a whole tea break telling how hard it is to be an umpire during the SCG Test...

Perhaps it needs to be played at the tea break for the next 50 Tests.

Many that have carped about morals, ethics and spirit of the game yada, etc, et al have formed their own blood thirsty lynch mobs around umpires without a drop of compassion and complete misunderstanding of the skills required.

http://wwos.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=344311
http://msnsport.skysports.com/story/0,19528,12123_3032342,00.html

However, Inzamam insists that many things are said during the heat of a Test match - including by Australian players - and that they should be forgotten once the match is over.

Inzamam said: "I have played a large part of my cricket against the Aussies. Sometimes they said some nasty stuff, sometimes we did and then we moved on.

An Aussie quoting Inzi on a cricket controversy. You sure you defending the Aus POV?

Zat wrote:

Mick Sawyer wrote:This is a great illustration of why it's so bloody hard to find "good" umpires. Those that sit it judgement & rate their performances have nfi how freaking difficult the jpb is..

Well, chennel Nein spent a whole tea break telling how hard it is to be an umpire during the SCG Test...

How hypocritical of them.Why don't they try giving the umpire the benefit,instead of carrying on about 2 bad decisions?

furriner wrote:An Aussie quoting Inzi on a cricket controversy. You sure you defending the Aus POV?

Noelene's not an Aussie . . .

. . . she's a farkin hamster.

Mick Sawyer wrote:

Zat wrote:

Mick Sawyer wrote:This is a great illustration of why it's so bloody hard to find "good" umpires. Those that sit it judgement & rate their performances have nfi how freaking difficult the jpb is..

Well, chennel Nein spent a whole tea break telling how hard it is to be an umpire during the SCG Test...

Perhaps it needs to be played at the tea break for the next 50 Tests.

Many that have carped about morals, ethics and spirit of the game yada, etc, et al have formed their own blood thirsty lynch mobs around umpires without a drop of compassion and complete misunderstanding of the skills required.

Of course, Nein put the umpires under more scrutiny than anyone, ever.

furriner wrote:An Aussie quoting Inzi on a cricket controversy. You sure you defending the Aus POV?

Just pointing out that even Inzy does not think the Aussies are that bad on the field.He surprised me actually.

tac wrote:

furriner wrote:An Aussie quoting Inzi on a cricket controversy. You sure you defending the Aus POV?

Noelene's not an Aussie . . .

. . . she's farkin a hamster.

What's the difference?

tac wrote:

furriner wrote:An Aussie quoting Inzi on a cricket controversy. You sure you defending the Aus POV?

Noelene's not an Aussie . . .

. . . she's a farkin hamster.

I always make my point.

Zat wrote:

Mick Sawyer wrote:

Zat wrote:

Mick Sawyer wrote:This is a great illustration of why it's so bloody hard to find "good" umpires. Those that sit it judgement & rate their performances have nfi how freaking difficult the jpb is..

Well, chennel Nein spent a whole tea break telling how hard it is to be an umpire during the SCG Test...

Perhaps it needs to be played at the tea break for the next 50 Tests.

Many that have carped about morals, ethics and spirit of the game yada, etc, et al have formed their own blood thirsty lynch mobs around umpires without a drop of compassion and complete misunderstanding of the skills required.

Of course, Nein put the umpires under more scrutiny than anyone, ever.

Yeah - I rarely watch leeeeeeg on TV any more for the same reasons. That is, the telecast is not about the football - the entertainment they prefer to serve up is the con-trow-visssy.

I made the point here the other day that the culture within US baseball broadcasting is to let the umpiring errors go, virtually without comment.

noelene wrote:

furriner wrote:An Aussie quoting Inzi on a cricket controversy. You sure you defending the Aus POV?

Just pointing out that even Inzy does not think the Aussies are that bad on the field.He surprised me actually.

Did you read this bit, Hamster?

Inzi the Aloo wrote:"We did not behave like cry-babies and drag it to the officials. They do it constantly and much more than anyone else. So how can they go out and complain about other teams?"

furriner wrote:

Mick Sawyer wrote:What about the fact that this shot is just a fraction of a second after his face (grill on the visor) smashed into the ground. With the point made earlier WRT him disclaiming the 1/171 opportunity, why's it so hard to believe that this was an honest error?

The shot before says the same thing. As for the declaiming thing, others have suggested reasons I will not get into because they will be conjecture. But how about the fact that Kumble has been a much admired sportsman in Australia for years, for the way he plays the game. Why is it so hard to believe him?

Mate - why is it so hard to accept that a minor head trauma may have messed with his senses for 5 or 10 seconds?

embee wrote:

noelene wrote:

furriner wrote:An Aussie quoting Inzi on a cricket controversy. You sure you defending the Aus POV?

Just pointing out that even Inzy does not think the Aussies are that bad on the field.He surprised me actually.

Did you read this bit, Hamster?

Inzi the Aloo wrote:"We did not behave like cry-babies and drag it to the officials. They do it constantly and much more than anyone else. So how can they go out and complain about other teams?"

I did,and would not have expected anything else from Inzy.We still have it in black and white that the Aussies are no worse than his team on the field,said by a Pakistani ex-captain.

Mick Sawyer wrote:

furriner wrote:

Mick Sawyer wrote:What about the fact that this shot is just a fraction of a second after his face (grill on the visor) smashed into the ground. With the point made earlier WRT him disclaiming the 1/171 opportunity, why's it so hard to believe that this was an honest error?

The shot before says the same thing. As for the declaiming thing, others have suggested reasons I will not get into because they will be conjecture. But how about the fact that Kumble has been a much admired sportsman in Australia for years, for the way he plays the game. Why is it so hard to believe him?

Mate - why is it so hard to accept that a minor head trauma may have messed with his senses for 5 or 10 seconds?

Because at the end of that day in a press conference he said nothing about a trauma. He insisted it was a fair catch. Till this day he has, to my knowledge, said nothing otherwise.

noelene wrote:

embee wrote:

noelene wrote:

furriner wrote:An Aussie quoting Inzi on a cricket controversy. You sure you defending the Aus POV?

Just pointing out that even Inzy does not think the Aussies are that bad on the field.He surprised me actually.

Did you read this bit, Hamster?

Inzi the Aloo wrote:"We did not behave like cry-babies and drag it to the officials. They do it constantly and much more than anyone else. So how can they go out and complain about other teams?"

I did,and would not have expected anything else from Inzy.We still have it in black and white that the Aussies are no worse than his team on the field,said by a Pakistani ex-captain.

Mick Sawyer wrote:

Zat wrote:

Mick Sawyer wrote:

Zat wrote:

Mick Sawyer wrote:This is a great illustration of why it's so bloody hard to find "good" umpires. Those that sit it judgement & rate their performances have nfi how freaking difficult the jpb is..

Well, chennel Nein spent a whole tea break telling how hard it is to be an umpire during the SCG Test...

Perhaps it needs to be played at the tea break for the next 50 Tests.

Many that have carped about morals, ethics and spirit of the game yada, etc, et al have formed their own blood thirsty lynch mobs around umpires without a drop of compassion and complete misunderstanding of the skills required.

Of course, Nein put the umpires under more scrutiny than anyone, ever.

Yeah - I rarely watch leeeeeeg on TV any more for the same reasons. That is, the telecast is not about the football - the entertainment they prefer to serve up is the con-trow-visssy.

I made the point here the other day that the culture within US baseball broadcasting is to let the umpiring errors go, virtually without comment.

It's the same in the NFL coverage. And they have video challenges there!

And on the subject of video challenges, the original NFL video ref system was abominable, it actually allowed a guy in a skybox to sattop the game whenever he liked to review a play. The fans hated it, and it disrupted the game way too much, hence the change to the challenge system. The current system means the umpire has 2 minutes to review the play once the challenge is called, and they have to find incontrovertible evidence. Given that smoe of the third ump decisions we see in cricket take 3, 4, even 5 minutes, what would be wrong with trialling challenges? But they have to remove any auithority for the central umps to refer.

Cricket officials, on the other hand, have taken up the 'let the opfficials

Mick Sawyer wrote:"and couldn't see much to bitch about except the Dravid dismissal . . . "

You know tac, I watched that again last night I can completely understand how the error was made. I've heard plenty of complaints from people saying that he had the bat tucked in behind the pad. What those critics missed while watching the bat was the fact that it passed less than the width of a cigarette paper from his left glove.

Who supplies your cigarette papers?

Both gloves were at least a foot from the ball.

"and couldn't see much to bitch about except the Dravid dismissal . . . "

Eh? What about the Ponting and Symonds nicks, where nothing but the bat was near the ball? Also, i don't get why Dravid was given out caught behind but Hussey wasn't when there was a similar deflection down the legside? Inconsistent umpiring?

Henry Nolonga wrote:"and couldn't see much to bitch about except the Dravid dismissal . . . "

Eh? What about the Ponting and Symonds nicks, where nothing but the bat was near the ball? Also, i don't get why Dravid was given out caught behind but Hussey wasn't when there was a similar deflection down the legside? Inconsistent umpiring?

Learn to read . . . that quote referred to the Indian 2nd dig.

tac wrote:

Henry Nolonga wrote:"and couldn't see much to bitch about except the Dravid dismissal . . . "

Eh? What about the Ponting and Symonds nicks, where nothing but the bat was near the ball? Also, i don't get why Dravid was given out caught behind but Hussey wasn't when there was a similar deflection down the legside? Inconsistent umpiring?

Learn to read . . . that quote referred to the Indian 2nd dig.

Sorry. I just read that quote from Mick Sawyer's quote.

Henry Nolonga wrote:

tac wrote:

Henry Nolonga wrote:"and couldn't see much to bitch about except the Dravid dismissal . . . "

Eh? What about the Ponting and Symonds nicks, where nothing but the bat was near the ball? Also, i don't get why Dravid was given out caught behind but Hussey wasn't when there was a similar deflection down the legside? Inconsistent umpiring?

Learn to read . . . that quote referred to the Indian 2nd dig.

Sorry. I just read that quote from Mick Sawyer's quote.

No worries, just having a dig.

Mick Sawyer wrote:

furriner wrote:

Lotsa videos on this thread; here's an image.

I have nothing to say about the Clarke catch (and this is not a new opinion). Foreshortening etc, Kumble agree with Ponting to accept the fielder's word etc, cry me a river. Fair enough. Happens all the time.

But it is difficult for me to accept that Ponting did not know the ball had touched the ground.
What would have been your reaction had an Indian or Pakistani claimed this catch?

What about the fact that this shot is just a fraction of a second after his face (grill on the visor) smashed into the ground. With the point made earlier WRT him disclaiming the 1/171 opportunity, why's it so hard to believe that this was an honest error?

Darrell Hair was on Sydney radio this week saying that the Ponting "catch" would have been out if it had hit the pad. Whether technically it is or not I have no doubt that all umpires would have given it out.

You mean glove, I think, JGK . . .

Err... yes.