Official Cricket 09/10 Thread

[dan_smee]

hey dan
i was watching the match online and had the text!

he is getting battered by the UK press
Botham is calling him a cheat

i'd say Bell is a cheat as well as he knew he was out and got lucky with the system

I would believe what Cook says any day of the week over Botham a) he is a more genuine guy, and b) HE WAS ON THE FIELD AND SAID WHAT HAPPENED!

And if the English press is getting into someone, we all know that that means the subject is in the wrong. English press is the most reputable on the planet

Bell got lucky, for sure, but as a batsman, you can easily miss some edges. Anything thin enough could feel like a crack of the handle (which happens 1000's of times over a bat's life, as handles are made of 13 or 16 pieces and glued together. The glue breaks when the bat is swung and makes a clicking sound similar to an edge), or a brush of the pads or any number of other things. Bell isn't a cheat, and it is a HUGE gamble if you know you are out to ask for a review.

Botham is as hot-headed and trigger-happy as a commentator as he was as a player. I expect him, in light of Cook and Clarke's comments to retract his statement. On the other hand, he has never been one to be particularly concerned about his credibility...

 

[Axver]

Well, commentators answer my question - apparently snicko can't be provided quickly enough for the review. Bit of a shame, that!

 

[dan_smee]

Shouldn't snicko be part of the review system?

I don't see too much wrong with the review system. We have seen the very occasional decision be given wrong after the review process, but far less than without it.

If anything should change, I would make it unlimited reviews, however if a review is unsuccessful, the team is docked 10 runs, and the player loses 10% of their match payment.

Watson wouldn't have wasted 3 reviews on selfish LBW calls this series if it had been like that (well, maybe he would actually!)

 

[Axver]

If anything should change, I would make it unlimited reviews, however if a review is unsuccessful, the team is docked 10 runs, and the player loses 10% of their match payment.

I can't get behind this at the moment, with the review system's inconsistency on close LBW calls.

Watson wouldn't have wasted 3 reviews on selfish LBW calls this series if it had been like that (well, maybe he would actually!)

Yeah, I wouldn't put it past him!

 

[intedomine]

Why aren't they declaring, 356 is surely enough to play around with?

 

[dan_smee]

I can't get behind this at the moment, with the review system's inconsistency on close LBW calls.



Yeah, I wouldn't put it past him!

I suppose my thinking there is that the system is, as everyone keeps pointing out, only there to remove the 'howeller'. Batsmen will only review if they hit the ball. Anything just sliding down leg they won't brazenly question on the off chance.

 

[dan_smee]

Why aren't they declaring, 356 is surely enough to play around with?

Yeah I agree,

Only thinking is that they want to ensure at least a draw (and therefore a series win), but surely they can't think Australia will win? That's insanity, and the hallmark of a conservative 'Ponting-like' captain.

Strauss probably just wants to make it embarrassing

 

[Axver]

The Poms are gunning for another win by an innings. I'm just worried they've left it too late and that Australia will come out with the most painfully slow display of defensive batting they possibly can. Australia's now in a position where, on current form, they know they almost certainly can't win. They have to first bash out 550-600 runs to set a competitive target, then take ten wickets. In 5 sessions? They can't do either of those in 5 sessions, let alone both.

I suppose my thinking there is that the system is, as everyone keeps pointing out, only there to remove the 'howeller'. Batsmen will only review if they hit the ball. Anything just sliding down leg they won't brazenly question on the off chance.

I just feel that if you're going to do something as drastic as docking runs or match fees, you better first make sure that out is always out and not out is always not out. You shouldn't dock runs or money in a situation where the system can give a delivery both out and not out.

 

[dan_smee]

Fair call. First need to clearly define out or not out. But if they are confident enough in the system to use in this way (potentially deciding matches with out/not out calls) why not able to dock runs, could be less costly than the removal of an out/not out decision. Money I totally get your point, it just burns me when players like Watson feel they are the most important link and just review based on the fact that they were out. The only place to hit Watson to deter him from reviewing is in the hip pocket.

 

[MadForIt]

for once i agree with Dan Smee (over the review system)

 

[1stepcloser]

Re Phil Hughes, here's what Botham said:

BOTHAM: "Well, that’s pretty ordinary in my book. He knows he hasn’t caught that. The wicketkeeper, he doesn’t think he’s caught it, the fielder knows he hasn’t caught it. Terrible, no other word for it: cheating. How much do you want it to bounce into your hands? And he knows. He knows he hasn’t caught it, there’s no appeal, then somebody else says something and he goes up. I’m all for playing the game hard, but that was cheating."

 

[dan_smee]

Again, Botham knows more than the English player who was on the field does he?

Hughes shrugged and said on the field "I don't know if I caught it".

He never claimed the catch. Botham, once again, is saying shit because it sounds cool. He is as bad as Warne.

 

[dan_smee]

Calling that Aus will be skittled for less than 200. Nothing to play for, they can't just bat it out, the players are too agressive, and who cares if you lose 2-1 or 3-1. They should not even worry about losing, and use it as practice in the middle

 

[Axver]

Well, Watson goes for it at the start!

 

[Axver]

Aaahahaha, finally WATSON gets run out!

 

[MadForIt]

Phew
thought he was going to win it for Aus until that moment

At least he's not run the guy out at the other end for once

 

[Axver]

Hughes's revenge for the MCG run out?

 

[1stepcloser]

Au revoir Hughes. Two diabolical Ashes series' for him then.

 

[Vlad n U 2]

Bye, Hughesy.

 

[MadForIt]

Au revoir Hughes. Two diabolical Ashes series' for him then.

Unlucky 13 for some

Or just a true reflection of how poor he is

 

[cobl04]

That was close to the ball of the series that one

 

[Vlad n U 2]

There's a guy called Ferguson who's pretty good but it's a shame he's not being selected because he plays for the wrong state.

 

[MadForIt]

There's a guy called Ferguson who's pretty good but it's a shame he's not being selected because he plays for the wrong state.

For a Belarussian, you seem to know a lot about cricket

 

[Vlad n U 2]

For a Belarussian, you seem to know a lot about cricket

Yeah, I seem to know a lot about everything.



But that's what you get when you live in Australia.

 

[Axver]

Clarke's putting in a half-decent knock here.

Khawaja (just dismissed!) gave his best impression of a snail. Not as impressive this innings.

 

[Axver]

There we go! Anderson pwns Clarke for 41. This game has definitely been an inauspicious captaincy debut.

Can Hussey and Haddin (two of the only guys on the team I rate) save Australia some face?

 

[intedomine]

Inspirational Captain's knock by Clarke. What a superstar he is!

 

[bono_man2002]

I'm waiting for England only needing a Beer to win

 

[Axver]

Huss and Haddin are gone, Tremlett's bowled a double wicket maiden ... carnage! Can the Poms finish this off tonight?

 

[cobl04]

If 9 cut to the news I'll be supremely pissed off.