Discussion in 'Cricket' started by Quick Hands, Jan 25, 2016.
Wella everybody's heard about the Bird etc.
NZ giving themselves a decent chance here. Anything over 200 could be tricky.
Going to be a very interesting chase, that's for sure. How's the wicket playing? NZ may rue not picking a spinner if it's starting to break up.
It's a tactic straight from the Pakistan play book.
They discovered/invented reverse swing. The subcontinental pitches certainly favour it because they are so dry and rough that the ball deteriorates faster.
I really don't see an issue with it. It's absolutely part of the game particularly when everything else favours the batsmen.
I'm OK with roughing up the ball so long as it doesn't lead to outright scratching/gouging or rubbing things on the ball that aren't sweat. After all, the ball hits the pitch and often the ground nearly every delivery and looking after the ball to get it to reverse is a skill in itself. You can't make it go the other way by beating the crap out it, otherwise it would reverse every time it got old.
Yes, but it's the laws of cricket which apply, not what we think is fair or right or appropriate. To me it's an anomaly that players can shine the ball, but can't do the opposite - but the laws are the laws.
The match ball - changing its condition
(a) Any fielder may
(i) polish the ball provided that no artificial substance is used and that such polishing wastes no time.
(ii) remove mud from the ball under the supervision of the umpire.
(iii) dry a wet ball on a piece of cloth.
(b) It is unfair for anyone to rub the ball on the ground for any reason, to interfere with any of the seams or the surface of the ball, to use any implement, or to take any other action whatsoever which is likely to alter the condition of the ball, except as permitted in (a) above.
(c) The umpires shall make frequent and irregular inspections of the ball.
(d) If the umpires together agree that the deterioration in the condition of the ball is greater than is consistent with the use it has received, they shall consider that there has been a contravention of this Law. They shall
(i) change the ball forthwith. It shall be for the umpires to decide on the replacement ball. It shall, in their opinion, have had wear comparable to that which the previous ball had received immediately prior to the contravention.
Yep. I have a theory that the ball is mostly roughed up by the batsmen when they hit it into the pitch square, or over the fence into concrete walls or paths. If the NZ batsmen are so concerned about the amount of reverse swing the Aus bowlers are getting, I suggest they stop hitting it into the turf and just hit it on the full to the closest fielder.
BTW, I was encouraged to see Wagner get no-balled and a warning (apparently) for excessive bouncers in the second innings. Better late than never, I say. How he wasn't no-balled for overstepping on the delivery he fell down in his last over though is a mystery. Clear ground between the line and his heel where he landed on the front foot just before he took the tumble.
Anyway, 130-odd to win, and barring a traditional mid-order collapse we're back to #1. Hardly feels worth it after thumping the Windies and having a moderately successful double-series against the Kiwis.
I want to put the Poms to the fucking sword.
Yep, it's within striking distance now and a well deserved series victory is hopefully the end result. The key thing will be to not get bogged down and artificially increase the pressure. The boys just need to go out there as if it's 1/0, accumulate steadily and make the bowlers come to them -- just like the first innings.
Hazelwood charged with dissent & takes the early guilty plea. Match Ref Broad to impose a sanction after its all over tomorrow (mid-afternoon, I would think).
Probably fair enough too. Fortunately these incidents are few an far between and I reckon the five tests have been played almost totally in the right away across the summer.
Should cop a match and some cash, but he was not alone. The carry-on by a few Aus players over that call was embarrassing.
Behavior is inexcusable, players deserve more or less whatever they get.
Still, can't help but think that the umpire should give a little bit more than a stoic shake of the head. Kettlebot has been head and shoulders above his counterparts on the field and in the box this series.
Fine given - 15% of match fee.
Incident is here if you missed it
The quality of that on field mike is amazing. Wonder if the local producer turns it up when the Aussies are fielding.
We might end up back in the day when Gilchrest used to talk about non-sponsors when they didn't want the broadcasters eavesdropping.
le plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose
A fair penalty imo. There wasn't any maliciousness in his voice, just an enquiry to ask who the third umpire was. Without the expletive (which is one of the most common in-use words in the language today, anyway) there wouldn't have even been any concern.
And just for the record, there was a small hot spot on the bat before it hit, or didn't hit, the ball. Probably caused by glancing off the pad on the way down, but it was there and seemed to be the same spot it was decided the ball made contact. Given how many replays are gone over time and again to decide most referred matters, this decision was unusually quick.
Nothing in it. Once again the internet is in an mock outrage over sweet fuck all while actual outrageous things are ignored. Clearly out though. The hot spot definitely changes after the ball passes.
Underated stat - Joe Burns faced 483 balls this match, second only to Pointing 500 v India in 2012 over the last 10 years. Decent effort that.
And then, with 16 runs to get, cricket enacts it's stupid rigidity and the players walk off for lunch.
I love test cricket but it really doesn't help itself sometimes.
Separate names with a comma.