England v Australia, 2nd test, Lord's, July 16-20 (II)

Mick Sawyer wrote:

Not sure how the commentators are claiming that the referral system would have changed it though - would you really refer clear-cut dismissals like that in the hope that it might be a no-ball?

FWIW I've long believed that the burden of calling no balls should be taken away from the umps. With that said, checking for a no ball on every dismissal should be an automatic part of a system that involves television review.

Yeah it would be, but my point was that nobody would ever have referred that particular dismissal, because there was nothing dodgy about it apart from the remote possibility of a no-ball. You'd only refer one just in the hope of a no-ball if it was your last wicket so nothing to lose by doing so.

Surely it should be easy enough to have some kind of automatic system to check whether the bowler's foot breaks the line though.

sensing another Edgbaston 2005

Nath wrote:sensing another Edgbaston 2005

I'm sensing another Adelaide! Only worse!

Adelbaston would be nice.

If this goes the way of Adelaide, I'm going out and buying five crates of beer to drink myself into a stupor in which nothing will matter any more. I'll be so f*cked off if we lose this I'll have to do summat.

The media will be savage if England screw this up. The crowd at Edgbaston will be even more ferocious at the English, if they aren't 1-0 up at the toss in a few weeks.

Nerves farked to bits this evening.... with yellow shirted Aussies dobbling around doing abbo dances around the Pavillion ...
they may well have something to celebrate - pride (for them) was restored.

138 - 5 , job done, early baths all round - go home happy.
But Clarke and Haddit had different ideas.

Okay - Jimmy bowled some gash in the morning - well, lots of it ... and we got some dodgy calls (though Strausser swears he took the ball clean) ... but take nothing away from Clarke and Haddin ... on a flat track under dark cloud for most of the 2.5 hours together, they batted f**king brilliantly - Clarke in particular. Seeing it big, dancing out to Swanny, carving the quicks - he did it all (bastard)... and he deserved his ton. Haddin took awhile, but he too started seeing it large, fed Clarke the strike when bunny-hopping against Fred ... then gained confidence and began striking good balls for 4's.

Strauss was bang to right to declare when he did ... the clouds this morning were low and the atmosphere damp as the proverbial ... Was just a pity Jimmy didn't support Fred that first hour. Broad bowled some good 'uns - though Onions looked innocuous.

Taking a flaggon of whiskey and a satchel of valium along tomorrow - going to need them both come the second session.
The game's on a knife edge - and I fancy that if they don't bag Clarke early, England are farked. The bugger looks solid in both defence and attack ...

I still go England win - but only if we have a wicket (preferably two) in the first hour. After that, the games gawn.

Yeah it would be, but my point was that nobody would ever have referred that particular dismissal, because there was nothing dodgy about it apart from the remote possibility of a no-ball. You'd only refer one just in the hope of a no-ball if it was your last wicket so nothing to lose by doing so.

Yep.

Surely it should be easy enough to have some kind of automatic system to check whether the bowler's foot breaks the line though.

Yep.

Agree with Merls, if we don't get a wicket in the first hour then we are farked.

I still go England win - but only if we have a wicket (preferably two) in the first hour. After that, the games gawn.

It was a fanatastic effort by Clarke & Haddin but we all understand that two wickets can happen in a flash. England still the outrageous favourtes.

Chivalry Augustus wrote:If this goes the way of Adelaide, I'm going out and buying five crates of beer to drink myself into a stupor in which nothing will matter any more. I'll be so f*cked off if we lose this I'll have to do summat.

I'm going to be on harder stuff than beer if we lose this! The minute they grab those final runs I will be driving to the shop, buying a bottle of whiskey, going to a friends house and drinking the whole thing straight. He'll have to get his own drink.

A much happier picture would be us somehow salvaging this. In which case I will go to a bench somewhere and laugh for a few hours.

This techno crat BS is getting out of hand now - and ffs let's not go down the tennis route with chimes sounding for an overstep ...

This is farcical as well ... BOTH teams agreed to "Play under lights" when the clouds gather.

So what happens?
the umpires hold the f**king ball an inch above the pitch to determine the "strength" of the 4 pointed shadow versus the "natural" shadow - and if the former is stronger thann the other, then the light is offered to the batsmen.

Now I know God is good and the sun shineth through dark cloud all that crap - but when you have four 150 feet high pylons at four corners of the stadium, each one carrying around 60 bright "Audi" type halogen lights focused on the turf below, what fecking chance does natural "sunlight" from 94 million miles away have of winning the battle against the 240 halogens?

Point being - Either you PLAY under lights as agreed - or you don't if it gets dark.
Faffing around 'determining shadows' is a guaranteed act within minutes of the lights going on ... as happened this evening.

These umpires really need to be kicked off the elite panel (mainly Doctrove) after this match. I've seen/heard/read nothing but rubbish in regards to their performance.


Awful.

I don't see what would be wrong with a no-ball "cyclops" if it worked and didn't get in the way.

But I think returning to the back foot no-ball law would be easier.

It's much easier for umpires to call correctly and gives them more time to look down the other end.

It would also lead to a massive reduction in the number of no-balls.

As for dragging, it wouldn't be the end of the world to have a law change that favours the bowlers, but if you're really worried about it may I quote Richie Benaud:

In 1961 we had the most wonderful series, and there was only one no-ball in the entire summer, by Fred Trueman. The umpires told us, 'we want you to be landing on the bowling crease or thereabouts, so no bowler is taking an unfair advantage. If we feel he is then we'll warn him and then call him.' That's what happened to Fred. There was no time wasted, no 26 no-balls in an innings."

vilkrang wrote:

Chivalry Augustus wrote:If this goes the way of Adelaide, I'm going out and buying five crates of beer to drink myself into a stupor in which nothing will matter any more. I'll be so f*cked off if we lose this I'll have to do summat.

I'm going to be on harder stuff than beer if we lose this!

Relax, we have things perfectly under control. Australia are nowhere near winning this game.

I'll be taking up tiddliwinks the day a "ping" resounds around a stadium for an overstep.
Reason being I wouldn't stop peeing myself laughing at the absurdity of it all.

I do agree however that reverting to the back foot rule would be a more suitable solution.

JKLever wrote:

vilkrang wrote:

Chivalry Augustus wrote:If this goes the way of Adelaide, I'm going out and buying five crates of beer to drink myself into a stupor in which nothing will matter any more. I'll be so f*cked off if we lose this I'll have to do summat.

I'm going to be on harder stuff than beer if we lose this!

Relax, we have things perfectly under control. Australia are nowhere near winning this game.

Looks like Rudi Coetzen to me

It will be all over within an hour.

I hope so anyway. The alternative is we get closer and closer and my hopes get higher and higher. Until at 9 down with 2 runs needed, Fred conjures up some bizarre wicket, strikes his "Let's see Jesus do that" pose and I end up needing to buy a new tv.

footwork wrote:Well I can't imagine English fans agreeing, but since three of our top order bats were gunned - freaking disgusting umpiring- I think Aus has done brilliantly to partially recover.
Imagine if they'd all been allowed to bat until they were actually out.

And I've just developed a newfound loathing of certain English commentators, such as the eejit who said, 'bad luck!', in sarcy tone, when the ump got it wrong. And the one who said, 'England has bowled so brilliantly, they've deserved these wickets.'
What the?
I'm sick of 'it's all swings and roundabouts', when the other team is on the receiving end. If England had lost most of their bloody top order to crapulence, they'd be talking about 'cheating', not 'swings and roundabouts.'

On the posditive side, we're into a 5th day and it could swing either way. This is the eternal optimist speaking.
And if it rains all day, you can sympathise with me on www.feckinfriggincricket.com.

Aye lead by a cheating qunt of a captain that claims catches on the bounce.

I'm not sure whether I'd rather think like you lot or not.

I know it might seem like I'm just being a massive pessimist today, but that's not usually my way. I've just had this gut feeling that we are destined to lose this match ever since we've been doing well. In my head it's so inevitable.

I would LOVE to be wrong and being right won't make me any less crushed.

Hass wrote:I don't see what would be wrong with a no-ball "cyclops" if it worked and didn't get in the way.

No reason why the third umpire couldn't be sat watching every ball in real-time from a camera trained solely on the crease. Umps in the middle have an earpiece. Third umpire just relays the no-ball information straight to the guy in the middle, who then sticks his arm out. No waiting for replays. No real delay. He could get the information to him before the ball's even reached the keeper.

One less thing to worry about.

vilkrang wrote:I'm not sure whether I'd rather think like you lot or not.

I know it might seem like I'm just being a massive pessimist today, but that's not usually my way. I've just had this gut feeling that we are destined to lose this match ever since we've been doing well. In my head it's so inevitable.

I would LOVE to be wrong and being right won't make me any less crushed.

If the Poms + Umps can't wrap this up in under a session moral victory to Aus. :laule:

You almost hope Aus win this so we don't have to listen to all the whinging about the umpires.

Seriously i've seen several forums, if it's not the umpires it's the Sky commentators. Australians don't whinge though, of course...

Mearly taking lessons from those that have made it a artform over the centuries.

Great effort by Pup and Haddit to set a few Pom nerves a-jangling.

Can't say I was concerned with the no-ball "not out" - good ball, Fleas was beaten by it - out. But the non-referral of the Hughes "catch" was stoopidly inconsistent and Hussey's simply wasn't out.

If that's whinging, then sue me.