Printable View
although, lets be honest, how ****e were the umpires? 6 overturned decisions and a proper balls up on not giving Stokes out.
I did think the one error Stokes made was not taking the single to tie the scores just before that but hey, doesn't matter now :-)
Oddly enough, I agree with the umpire and Stokes about that lbw. The ball tracking looked all wrong to me and seemed to just draw a straight line between the ball pitching and it making contact with the back pad, ignoring the fact that it clipped the front pad on the way through and clearly didn't spin enough to pitch on leg stump and go on to hit leg stump. It's made me slightly dubious about the technology tbh.Quote:
Originally Posted by PSRB
I did think in real time that it looked like it was sliding down legQuote:
Originally Posted by Burney
:nod: I'm pretty sure it was.Quote:
Originally Posted by PSRB
And actually, Wilson had a decent umpiring game. Gaffaney made most of the errors.
All the more amusing as they wasted their last review on that dreadful LBW shout a couple of overs prior :hehe:
yes, apparently the cricket was rather good.Quote:
Originally Posted by PSRB
but then, good for, you know, cricket.
:cricket:
Don't want to sound like miserable git but I seem to be the only one who thinks Stokes was really unprofessional in the way couldn't look near the end when Leach was batting. It was so fúcking good tho so I don't mind really :-)Quote:
Originally Posted by PSRB
I couldn't watch either, kept walking out the room when Leach was facingQuote:
Originally Posted by barrybueno
The Young lad we shipped off to Sunderland?Quote:
Originally Posted by PSRB
No, that's the slightly stalkery Anthony StokesQuote:
Originally Posted by Pat Vegas
Blaming Joel Wilson is just a shameless Aussie tactic to cover up butterfingers Lyon imo :nod:
Hopeless...that was a regulation play ground run out imo
It was an awful throw as well but yes, he should have still gathered the ball as had plenty of timeQuote:
Originally Posted by Tony C
It's ridicules what pressure can do. I once skippered a game where the oppo needed 2 off the last ball. They squirted it out to point, where the normally quite good fielder managed to turn what should have been a very risky single into two by simply being unable to pick the fúcking thing up. Honestly, you'd have thought he was trying to pick up a wet bar of soap.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tony C
Still winds me up. :-( I had to grit my teeth to console him and reassure him we didn't blame him although we absolutely did, the fumbling ****.
Sort of thing that could end a player's career. Aussies extremely twitchy about that being brought up. Really can't take it - biggest whiners on Earth (well them and Spurs and Liverpool fans)Quote:
Originally Posted by PSRB
:hehe: should hopefully demoralise Lyon and Cummins :-)Quote:
Originally Posted by Burney
I was almost going to have to sell my OT tickets, now I can't wait
:nod: I've actually seen a couple of Aussies admit as much on social media over the last few days.Quote:
Originally Posted by Luis Anaconda
tbf there is some great and fair coverage in the Aussie media - and think most of them are embarrassed by the Australian piece (which I assume you saw)Quote:
Originally Posted by Burney
:nod: Geoff Lemon seems a decent sort. I must admit I just laughed when I saw the first couple of sentences of The Australian piece and didn't bother reading further, assuming it to be a wind-up.Quote:
Originally Posted by Luis Anaconda
I went straight to the comments - a real mix on "Good on you" and "You a prat"Quote:
Originally Posted by Burney
What did you think about the lbw, la? I'm far from convinced Wilson wasn't right to give it not out.Quote:
Originally Posted by Luis Anaconda
Simon Hughes (who I think is a bit of prat) is convinced that DRS was correct and did show the ball hitting the front padQuote:
Originally Posted by Burney
The ball-tracking after it hits the front pad doesn't ring true - it was going on. Leg stump at best, probably umpire's callQuote:
Originally Posted by Burney
It showed it hitting, but didn't seem to take account of the deflection, showing the ball travelling in a straight line from the pitch to where it hit Stokes' back leg without deviating at all. That's just not physically possible if it's hit the front pad first.Quote:
Originally Posted by PSRB
:nod: My thoughts exactly.Quote:
Originally Posted by Luis Anaconda
Hawkeye out! ?Quote:
Originally Posted by Luis Anaconda
What happened to hot spot, btw?
Didn't they find out it could be fooled by silicone bat tape and thus rendered meaningless?Quote:
Originally Posted by Ash
Ultra edge these day, innit. Think it was felt that hot spot was a bit ****Quote:
Originally Posted by Ash
Snicko by another name.Quote:
Originally Posted by PSRB
It's just a audio recording. If I was the 'keeper I'd perfect an impersonation of an edge to help move things along a bit when the danger man's in.
Or buy a small recording device that can replay the sound of an actual snick? The timing would be the tricky bit.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ash
This is a step beyond sandpaper when it comes to cheating imo.
Is it up there with jelly beans, though? Having such a device about one's person might give the game away a bit, and a click of the tongue is easier to cue and control than an audio recording. Batsmen could try saving themselves an LBW too by faking a bat-pad.Quote:
Originally Posted by Burney
I love the idea of everyone clicking away furiously. :hehe:Quote:
Originally Posted by Ash
There was the mysterious instance in, I think, the Australian first innings when a disembodied spike appeared on Snicko at the same time as nothing else seemed to be in contact, and wafted to the centre of the window just as the ball passed the bat. TV Ump said out. Batsmen very unhappy. :sherlock:Quote:
Originally Posted by Burney
Tim Paine wasn't it? He seems like a prick, so fair do's, imoQuote:
Originally Posted by Ash