Australia v England, 1st Test, Brisbane, Nov 25-29, 2010

skully wrote:And Jebus, the old girl (Flaming Bails) is humming at the moment.

Amazing what the effect is of decent cricket on a cricket forum

Henry wrote:

Jontyh wrote:KP won't miss out on this buffet..

Which side are you on FFS?

Eh? Same flag as you, Trev.

Me too.

embee wrote:

JGK wrote:

embee wrote:If Dar had given Trott out ...and the Poms referred it ...would it have been overturned?

Where in the Laws of cricket does it say that more than 50% of the ball has to be hitting the stumps for it to be LBW?

No, it would have been out. The third umps decision was "On field umps call".

As the TV umpire failed to make a decision then the challenge shouldnt be counted as unsuccessful

Yeah, I agree with that. It is the biggest fault in the UDRS system.

Is that sickly-looking bald chap in the England dressing room Adam Lyth?

It should count as one, because you get an advantage by going to the replay regardless of what decision is made.

Dello wrote:Is that sickly-looking bald chap in the England dressing room Adam Lyth?

Could be any number of people involved with the England team.

skully wrote:And Jebus, the old girl (Flaming Bails) is humming at the moment.

Just need the Ashes for 12 months of the year.


.......Then again

Paul Keating wrote:It should count as one, because you get an advantage by going to the replay regardless of what decision is made.

But if the system has a built in "benefit of the doubt" then it is random whether or not the original decision was out or not and therefore a bit unfair that you lose an appeal.

Henry wrote:

Zat wrote:

embee wrote:If Dar had given Trott out ...and the Poms referred it ...would it have been overturned?

Where in the Laws of cricket does it say that more than 50% of the ball has to be hitting the stumps for it to be LBW?

It doesn't. You know that of course. It's just another example of the 'half-pregnant' stance taken by the ICC. Either use the technology fully, or don't. If you're using HawkEye, then you're saying you have faith in it.

Henry wrote:
Of course, we're assuming that hawkeye is 100% accurate. There was doubt there. Benefit of the doubt etc.

Nowhere in the Laws of cricket is there anything written about 'Benefit of the doubt'. Nowhere. Not even once.

And when Ponting is given out to a ball JUST clipping the leg bail according to hawkeye, and he refers it and is still given out, will you still be thinking the same thing?

Given that I've said exactly the same thing about using Hawk Eye (or 'Virtual Eye' or whatever variant Nein is using this summer) for as long as the system has been in place, I can safely say yes. Use the technology definitively or not at all. It's simple.

Jontyh wrote:It's certainly an anomaly that the 3rd umpire's decision would have been out or not out depending on who appealed. I think that's the point, not whether either team is hard done by.

That's something I've said all along. The batsman is either out if the ball was going to hit the stumps, or safe if the ball was going to miss.

Saying he's not out if the ball was going to hit but the question was asked by the bowling team, but still out if the question is asked by the batting team is ludicrous.

So, what's a good score from here then? One ball has just kicked at KP, but I think 400 is still the minimum requirement.

It may be a decent ball from Watto, but it's poor batting technique again from Trotto.

By all accounts a decent pitch for batting, and bowling has been generally okay - i.e. too much of the batting has been substandard.

Swannie will dominate on this pitch.

Basil wrote:So, what's a good score from here then? One ball has just kicked at KP, but I think 400 is still the minimum requirement.

I think the pitch will quicken up tomorrow. 350 and England are still in the game.

Watto bowls anb absolute peach to Cookie who isn't good enough to get an edge on it.

Jeez, Nicklearse waxing lyrical about Watto (well he is blond)

Will the X-man get an over or two at KP before lunch?

Any good nicknames for Doherty? Ken? Charles?

If Engand get hold of him, maybe 'D'oh!erty'?

Dodo, if his career is short-lived?

X-terminator if he comes off?

Henry wrote:If Engand get hold of him, maybe 'D'oh!erty'?

Or out to him.

Labia Dirty.

doctorspin wrote:Jeez, Nicklearse waxing lyrical about Watto (well he is blond)

Watto should just lube up, bend over, grit his teeth and get it over and done with because Nicko is like a dog with a bone - just ask Brett Lee.

Lovely straight drive by KP.

Doughnutty to get an over before lunch?