England v Australia, 3rd Test, Edgbaston, Jul 30-Aug 3 (II)

That was over the top. Correct decision.

But Rudi gave a couple of Aussies out to balls that were no more over the top than that.

Hilf and Siddle swinging it on target though, and will create more chances.

Hawkeye is just a computer animation, it doesn't prove anything.

Clutch wrote:Hawkeye is just a computer animation, it doesn't prove anything.

The ground-level cam seems to confirm Hawkeye.

Well Rudi's opinion is the only one that counts at the end of the day, but I reckon that Bell owes him a beer!

Rob I wrote:

Clutch wrote:Hawkeye is just a computer animation, it doesn't prove anything.

The ground-level cam seems to confirm Hawkeye.

Did you say anything when a very similar Hawkeye showed Mitchell Johnson should have been given not out?

Zat wrote:

Rob I wrote:

Clutch wrote:Hawkeye is just a computer animation, it doesn't prove anything.

The ground-level cam seems to confirm Hawkeye.

Did you say anything when a very similar Hawkeye showed Mitchell Johnson should have been given not out?

Yes, Hawkeye showed Mitch's wicket was one where the delivery was clearly going over the stumps. He was given out erroneously and also erroneously deprived of a wicket.

Zat wrote:

Rob I wrote:

Clutch wrote:Hawkeye is just a computer animation, it doesn't prove anything.

The ground-level cam seems to confirm Hawkeye.

Did you say anything when a very similar Hawkeye showed Mitchell Johnson should have been given not out?

Meh - pad up to a straight one, and I think it's fair enough that some of the benefit of doubt is lost.

Red wrote:

Zat wrote:

Rob I wrote:

Clutch wrote:Hawkeye is just a computer animation, it doesn't prove anything.

The ground-level cam seems to confirm Hawkeye.

Did you say anything when a very similar Hawkeye showed Mitchell Johnson should have been given not out?

Yes, Hawkeye showed Mitch's wicket was one where the delivery was clearly going over the stumps. He was given out erroneously and also erroneously deprived of a wicket.

So Rob is now Red?

Sorry to sound crude here, but stick that up your arse, Strauss...

Crap shot, Johann.

Zat wrote:

Rob I wrote:

Clutch wrote:Hawkeye is just a computer animation, it doesn't prove anything.

The ground-level cam seems to confirm Hawkeye.

Did you say anything when a very similar Hawkeye showed Mitchell Johnson should have been given not out?

I didn't specify MJ, though I did mention further up this thread that a couple of Aussies were given out to ones very similar to the Bell not-out, which suggests to me inconsistent interpretation by Rudi.

Rob I wrote:

Zat wrote:

Rob I wrote:

Clutch wrote:Hawkeye is just a computer animation, it doesn't prove anything.

The ground-level cam seems to confirm Hawkeye.

Did you say anything when a very similar Hawkeye showed Mitchell Johnson should have been given not out?

I didn't specify MJ, though I did mention further up this thread that a couple of Aussies were given out to ones very similar to the Bell not-out, which suggests to me inconsistent interpretation by Rudi.

The biggest weapon an umpire can have in his armoury is consistency. Because at least the players have some idea what they need to do. It's something sorely lacking thus far.

Here you go Zatty, here's me on from page 62:

Yeah, I feel sorry for Johnno. He seems a likeable bloke and a huge talent. He got a rough one when he batted and then that terrible lbw decision against Shermi.

Cheers Rob.

It's refreshing to have a keeper who can keep.

And let's look on the bright side. Rudi won't be umpiring any more in this series, for the fourth and fifth Test it's Billy Bowden and Asad Rauf.

Might as well kill myself now. I'm not a fan of Koertzen, but Bowden, I'm sure, genuinely thinks the crowd has paid money to watch him umpire, with the match being incidental.

And you can tell Bell got bat on that. He didn't run all over the shop after getting it on the pad.

Good catch

Well bowled Hilfy.

So, will the ball now stop swinging during the lunch break?

Loose, Colly, loose.

Just before lunch as well. Stooopid.

Zat wrote:Well bowled Hilfy.

So, will the ball now stop swinging during the lunch break?

Yes, but it might start swinging again when it's bowled some more...

go hilfy!

Clutch wrote:

Zat wrote:Well bowled Hilfy.

So, will the ball now stop swinging during the lunch break?

Yes, but it might start swinging again when it's bowled some more...

Oh har-de-har-har. Touche.

Big_Bad_Bob wrote:Loose, Colly, loose.

Just before lunch as well. Stooopid.

yep, no need at all to play at that, wide of off stump and going further away.

Well ... pressure innings needed from the Bellhop now ... needs to stay and build around the tail ...

Will he do it?

Off to play my game now so going to miss the last 2 sessions ...
... let's hope England are 300+ by c o p tonight with a couple still in the hutch.

Well, I've gotta hit the hay. In advance, I'll congratulate Ian Bell in advance on becoming the first Warwickshire player to score a Test century at Edgbaston.

And I'll ask the question, why - if Watson was brought in to strengthen the batting and the bowling - hasn't he bowled yet?