BS: cricket terrible decision

Subject: BS: cricket terrible decision
From: The Sandman
Date: 27 Aug 19 - 04:03 AM

Australian media claim they were robbed when Ben Stokes was incorrectly given not out.

Subject: RE: BS: cricket terrible decision
From: The Sandman
Date: 27 Aug 19 - 04:06 AM

it was a good effort by leach and stokes, but in reality akin to the charge of the light brigade, a waste of time .[england will lose the ashes when smith returns]
stokes knew he was out and should have walked, but obviously he is not a gentleman

Subject: RE: BS: cricket terrible decision
From: Raggytash
Date: 27 Aug 19 - 04:39 AM

Few are in 21st Century cricket.

However Dick, instead of trying to sow dissension (as you are noted for) you could, like the rest of us, celebrate an amazing innings and an amazing win for England

Subject: RE: BS: cricket terrible decision
From: David C. Carter
Date: 27 Aug 19 - 05:16 AM

What Raggytash said.

Subject: RE: BS: cricket terrible decision
From: Dave Hanson
Date: 27 Aug 19 - 05:33 AM

There is too much money in modern sport for it to be truly sporting anymore.

Dave H

Subject: RE: BS: cricket terrible decision
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 27 Aug 19 - 05:42 AM

The Aussies wasted their last review on a hopeless earlier case, so when Stokes was incorrectly given not out they had no reviews left. Has the decision been reviewed, that would have been it. It's not cricket, old boy...

Subject: RE: BS: cricket terrible decision
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 27 Aug 19 - 07:17 AM

Modern cricket is a funny game. The pitch of 22yards was decided in an age when everyone was a about a foot less tall.

It would be interesting to know when these lethal deliveries started.

The Stokes innings would still have been a good innings, even if we had lost the test and the series. There's no way to prove that he cheated., I agree - he should have walked if he definitely knew he was out, whatever the consequence.

Still that sort of sneakiness, and getting away with what you can has been part of the game at least as long as Victorian times. There are accounts of WG Grace bending the rules.

Subject: RE: BS: cricket terrible decision
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 27 Aug 19 - 07:41 AM

Nothing new - it’s been a common practice...

I particularly like the one where WGG tells the official, “Play on - people have come to see me bat, not you umpire”. I’m sure he had a point...

Subject: RE: BS: cricket terrible decision
From: Raggytash
Date: 27 Aug 19 - 09:01 AM

Well there's the "Bodyline" series of 1932-33 Al.

Subject: RE: BS: cricket terrible decision
From: SPB-Cooperator
Date: 27 Aug 19 - 09:36 AM

If it had been the other way, and the Umpire gave out when it was an obvious wrong decision and England had no more reviews left, would Australia have asked the umpire to change his decision? Sometimes a player just gets lucky.

Subject: RE: BS: cricket terrible decision
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 27 Aug 19 - 09:36 AM

I think it's a bit unfair to accuse Stokes of not walking. It was an LBW shout, not a snick or something. The batsman is hardly in the best position to know whether he is directly in front, etc.

Subject: RE: BS: cricket terrible decision
From: SPB-Cooperator
Date: 27 Aug 19 - 09:52 AM

Well if Stokes had eyes in the back of his head, then he would be able to tell if the ball hitting. In the end it is just sour grapes on Australia's part.

Subject: RE: BS: cricket terrible decision
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 27 Aug 19 - 09:59 AM

SPB, Steve - pretty much my thoughts too.

Subject: RE: BS: cricket terrible decision
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 27 Aug 19 - 10:40 AM

To be fair to the Aussie team, they seem to be philosophical about the whole thing and lament their own mistakes rather than cast nasturtiums at Stokes or the umpire. It's the Aussie media doing that. Bloody whingeing anti-poms...

Subject: RE: BS: cricket terrible decision
From: MikeL2
Date: 27 Aug 19 - 11:18 AM

hi

What a load of c**p - I have played and watched cricket for many years.

I have played with and against Australians for many years. Great guys.

But I have never seen an Aussie walk. They wait for the umpire to decide.

I don't think any Australian of the recent game held nothing but admiration for Stokes. As they walked off the pitch at the end. I noticed that every Australian player made a point of congratulating Stokes.

The press are just trying to create problems.

Cheers

Mike

Subject: RE: BS: cricket terrible decision
From: Jon Freeman
Date: 27 Aug 19 - 01:40 PM

"But I have never seen an Aussie walk."

Adam Gilchrist, the Australian wicket keeper/batsman, was known for his belief in walking but I don’t think you would find many “walkers” from any country within professional cricket.

Incidentally, Stokes has said that he believes the DRS verdict is wrong and that he was not LBW. Any feelings regarding the reliability of the technology?

Subject: RE: BS: cricket terrible decision
From: The Sandman
Date: 27 Aug 19 - 02:39 PM

Sowing dissension? no,encouraging discussion.
Raggy, i watch your antics below the line, along with about six others, fighting over who has the biggest mouth or willy. you are along with about six others arguing from an entrenched position and achieving nothing.

Subject: RE: BS: cricket terrible decision
From: Raggytash
Date: 27 Aug 19 - 03:53 PM

Dick, I have no desire to fall out with you but I'm sure that you are well aware of your reputation on this site.

Your second post was, to my mind, deliberately antagonistic.

"stokes knew he was out and should have walked, but obviously he is not a gentleman"

The batsmen cannot know for CERTAIN just where the ball in heading, it is up to the umpire to adjudge whether or not the ball will hit the stuffs.

The umpire made an error.

But all of this detracts from a stunning innings from Stokes, with stalwart defense from Jack Leach.

One that should be celebrated by every cricket fan in the country.

Subject: RE: BS: cricket terrible decision
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 27 Aug 19 - 04:13 PM

I never fight over who has the biggest willy. There's simply no contest. It can be a scourge at times...

Subject: RE: BS: cricket terrible decision
From: WalkaboutsVerse
Date: 27 Aug 19 - 06:24 PM

All sports have their weaknesses but "test" cricket has a huge one in that there is no punishment for an air-swing - unlike limited over cricket (a far better game, in my opinion) where the bowler, of course, gets rewarded with a "Dot-Ball"

Subject: RE: BS: cricket terrible decision
From: The Sandman
Date: 28 Aug 19 - 01:58 AM

well the positives are the series is well balanced.and still alive
Raggytash cricket is a sport, a game, it is not a political war, your comment about sowing dissension was out of order and unpleasant.
The game was exciting and stokes and leach did very well
In reality England lost the game, they won because of a bad umpiring decision, their first innings was very bad and their are questions about their batting line up that need to be sorted
Steve Smith will be back, and in my opinion the aussies have a good chance of winning the series.
Raggy, your rep on this site is one of being a part of a group who regularly mess up and insult people of opposing views below the line your post about sowing dissension is just another example

Subject: RE: BS: cricket terrible decision
From: The Sandman
Date: 28 Aug 19 - 02:09 AM

my suugestion is raggy that if there is a post that encourages discussion that instead of responding with a personal criticism, you actually concentrate on discussing the cricket.England have abatting fragilty, what should they do, drop Roy?play root in a different position in batting order

Subject: RE: BS: cricket terrible decision
From: Jon Freeman
Date: 28 Aug 19 - 02:27 AM

In reality England lost the game, they won because of a bad umpiring decision

If Lyon had taken a simple run out chance, we wouldn’t have got to the debated lbw. If Australia had been more prudent with their reviews, they would have been able to review the Stokes one. And there are possibly other “if only’s” that just might have altered the outcome of the game.

Umpires can make mistakes, players are entitled to (and usually do) stand their ground and there was nothing sinister about what happened. Get over it.

Subject: RE: BS: cricket terrible decision
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 28 Aug 19 - 02:45 AM

”Umpires can make mistakes, players are entitled to (and usually do) stand their ground and there was nothing sinister about what happened. Get over it.”

Absolutely correct, Jon. It’s always been so, there is nothing in the Laws of Cricket requiring a batsman to ‘give himself out’, and it’s understood by true lovers of the art of the greatest game in the world.

Subject: RE: BS: cricket terrible decision
From: The Sandman
Date: 28 Aug 19 - 02:57 AM

yes jon, but not a question of getting over it, more a question of sorting out the weak batting order, 69 in first innings, a feeble score. England had a bit of luck austraklia ran out of reviews they were approaching the end of the game and made one mistake about a review. none of which alters the question of englands first innings debacle, if they are to win the ashes they need to bowl and bat better, they need to get smith out early and they need to also get Labuschagne out. this article says it all theEngland were dismissed for a humiliating 67 as their hopes of reclaiming the Ashes were left hanging by a thread on a day that could prove a line in the sand for their misfiring Test batsmen.

Joe Root's side arrived at Headingley on the second morning of the third Test with a huge chance to play their way into a series-levelling position after toppling Australia for 179 but turned in a sorry, insipid display.

They were sunk inside 28 overs for England's third-lowest Ashes score on home turf and the eighth worst overall. Australia responded by reaching 171 for six at stumps, a lead of 283 that positions the holders to go 2-0 ahead with two to play.

The tourists deserve considerable credit for a fine bowling performance, not least Josh Hazlewood's highly-skilled five for 30, but the horror collapse has become a frustratingly frequent flaw.

This was the fourth time since the start of 2018 that England have been blasted out in double figures - with three of those in the past seven Tests - and it increasingly looks like a structural problem that requires serious and immediate attention. england England were dismissed for a humiliating 67 as their hopes of reclaiming the Ashes were left hanging by a thread on a day that could prove a line in the sand for their misfiring Test batsmen.

Joe Root's side arrived at Headingley on the second morning of the third Test with a huge chance to play their way into a series-levelling position after toppling Australia for 179 but turned in a sorry, insipid display.

They were sunk inside 28 overs for England's third-lowest Ashes score on home turf and the eighth worst overall. Australia responded by reaching 171 for six at stumps, a lead of 283 that positions the holders to go 2-0 ahead with two to play.

The tourists deserve considerable credit for a fine bowling performance, not least Josh Hazlewood's highly-skilled five for 30, but the horror collapse has become a frustratingly frequent flaw.

England were dismissed for a humiliating 67 as their hopes of reclaiming the Ashes were left hanging by a thread on a day that could prove a line in the sand for their misfiring Test batsmen.

PLEASE NOTE

This was the fourth time since the start of 2018 that England have been blasted out in double figures - with three of those in the past seven Tests -

Subject: RE: BS: cricket terrible decision
From: The Sandman
Date: 28 Aug 19 - 03:31 AM

So should Roy be dropped and who would replace him , or any other suggestions to improve batting?

Subject: RE: BS: cricket terrible decision
From: Raggytash
Date: 28 Aug 19 - 04:02 AM

Much has been written and spoken of in the media of how Australia were lacking their best batsman in Steve Smith.

I could point out that England were lacking their best bowler in James Anderson.

Subject: RE: BS: cricket terrible decision
From: The Sandman
Date: 28 Aug 19 - 04:42 AM

maybe, but Archer did well,What alternative batting strengths are there?

Subject: RE: BS: cricket terrible decision
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 28 Aug 19 - 05:10 AM

You can only play the team who turn up. 'Twas ever thus. City won the league last year despite their unarguably best player, Kevin de Bruyne, missing for much of the season. Liverpool almost got there despite the absences of The Ox and Adam Lallana. The team that wins is the team that makes fewer mistakes. Umpires and referees are human beings in sports played by human beings. Errors of judgement are part and parcel of the passion in sport. As long as there's no deliberate partiality we should enjoy it for what it is. Or just don't follow it at all if it irks you so.

Subject: RE: BS: cricket terrible decision
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 28 Aug 19 - 07:10 AM

It would help if you credited the source of your post of 28 Aug 19 - 02:57 AM, Dick. Or, if you want to try and claim the words as your own, at least don't paste them twice.

Subject: RE: BS: cricket terrible decision
From: The Sandman
Date: 28 Aug 19 - 08:12 AM

Time for pedantry Dave?do you dispute the content?breaking news here if you pssted it you would find it, here By Press Association

England were dismissed for a calamitous 67 as their hopes of reclaiming the Ashes were left hanging by a thread on a day that could prove a line in the sand for their misfiring Test batsmen.

Joe Root’s side arrived at Headingley on the second morning of the third Test with a huge chance to play their way into a series-levelling position after toppling Australia for 179, but ended up turning in a sorry, insipid display.

They were sunk inside 28 overs for England’s third-lowest Ashes score on home turf and the eighth worst overall. Australia responded by reaching 171 for six at stumps, a lead of 283 that positions the holders to go 2-0 ahead with two to play.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ihSxLyly9_k

Subject: RE: BS: cricket terrible decision
From: Dave Sutherland
Date: 28 Aug 19 - 08:48 AM

Possibly Stokes was under instructions to play to the umpire's decision? Apparently when Ian Botham was captain his normal team talk included the warning "don't anyone DARE walk"

Subject: RE: BS: cricket terrible decision
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 28 Aug 19 - 09:18 AM

Do batsmen ever walk after an LBW shout? Intriguing...

Subject: RE: BS: cricket terrible decision
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 28 Aug 19 - 09:33 AM

”Do batsmen ever walk after an LBW shout? Intriguing...”

Intriguing indeed, Steve. I find it difficult to see how a batsman would be able to judge whether the ball would have been ‘hitting’, and he’s not likely to be able to judge that the ball was legal, e.g.. no foot-foul on the part of the bowler - he would be watching the bowler’s arm/hand, not his foot, and he probably wouldn’t be able to see where the bowler’s foot fell in relation to the popping crease.

Subject: RE: BS: cricket terrible decision
From: The Sandman
Date: 28 Aug 19 - 01:41 PM

fair point back woodsman,

Subject: RE: BS: cricket terrible decision
From: MikeL2
Date: 28 Aug 19 - 02:46 PM

Hi Steve

" Do batsmen ever walk after an LBW shout?"

Nowadays it is extremely seldom for any professional Cricketer to walk for anything. It is far more usual for a batsman to be angry and argue even when they are plum out on the photo evidence.

Cheers

Mike

Subject: RE: BS: cricket terrible decision
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 28 Aug 19 - 04:24 PM

From the Mudcat article on appeals in cricket:

"Some decisions, such as leg before wicket, always require an appeal and the umpire's decision, as no batsman will preempt the umpire on what requires fine judgment of several factors."

Subject: RE: BS: cricket terrible decision
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 28 Aug 19 - 07:00 PM

Nah then, Mike, plumb (or plum) relates only to blatantly out LBW, nowt else. "Bloody umpire never give 'im out ell-bee, though we could all sithat 'e were plumb..." sort of thing. I contend that a batter would rarely be in a good position to decide whether he's out leg-before. With LBW it's always best to let the umpire decide. In most cases, the batter may have an inkling as to whether he's out or not, but he can't be sure enough to walk. Walk if tha's bowled or if tha's nicked it, if tha's a gent, but 'ang on if tha thinks that t'fielder grassed t'catch...

Subject: RE: BS: cricket terrible decision
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 28 Aug 19 - 07:01 PM

Dammit, not the Mudcat article. I meant wiki.

Subject: RE: BS: cricket terrible decision
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 31 Aug 19 - 08:01 AM

Crikey, cricket snobs, bloody stupid game !!

Subject: RE: BS: cricket terrible decision
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 31 Aug 19 - 10:08 AM

Hmm. As cricket is so redolent of the sound of leather on willow on village greens while nannies push babes in Silver Cross Balmorals past the tea room to the duck pond and warm beer is served at dinky tables under the weeping willow outside the little thatched inn, and as so many of the best cricketers are the product of public schools, etc., I'd have thought that cricket would actually be right up your Tory alley, Bonzo...

Subject: RE: BS: cricket terrible decision
From: SPB-Cooperator
Date: 01 Sep 19 - 12:40 PM

The only terrible decision is to refuse to allow people in the UK to watch test matches on television (unless we agree to line the pockets of the Sky scum) - or to build 10-20 million seater cricket grounds, free entry and free transport/accomodation.

Subject: RE: BS: cricket terrible decision
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 01 Sep 19 - 12:50 PM

I dislike cricket with every bone in my body, as much as I dislike the blonde idiot pm!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Subject: RE: BS: cricket terrible decision
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 01 Sep 19 - 02:16 PM

Well that's something anyway.

Subject: RE: BS: cricket terrible decision
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 01 Sep 19 - 02:21 PM

Every cloud has a silver lining...

Subject: RE: BS: cricket terrible decision
From: Raggytash
Date: 01 Sep 19 - 02:25 PM

Anyone who doesn't like Cricket has my full sympathy. You really don't understand just what your missing.

Subject: RE: BS: cricket terrible decision
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 01 Sep 19 - 02:58 PM

Agreed, Raggy. It takes intelligence....

Subject: RE: BS: cricket terrible decision
From: Raggytash
Date: 01 Sep 19 - 03:33 PM

For once I was trying to be polite Backwoodsman!!

Subject: RE: BS: cricket terrible decision
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 01 Sep 19 - 03:40 PM

But then I love polo - on ponies that is!!!

Subject: RE: BS: cricket terrible decision
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 01 Sep 19 - 04:16 PM

Yeah but come on, Bonz, most of the buggers who play polo are the type of rich buggers who you were castigating as cricket snobs! Polo players are nearly always well minted!

Oi, see what I just did there...?