*****Official Ashes thread*****
- Thread starter rotters
- Start date
Nah you guys have it in the bag now, there is no way the Aussie batsman can chase this down
I think that the reviews system has changed walking, for me. Previously, I was fully of the opinion that if you nicked it you should walk. Now if you nick it, the other side can review it. If they've used up their reviews, it's their own fault.
Soldato
- Joined
- 19 Apr 2004
- Posts
- 4,793
- Location
- London
Agreed. And I don't agree with those that think the 3rd umpire should have a word either - if you don't use DRS properly it's your fault!
I don't have an issue with him standing his ground, but that raised a smirk.I agree with Strauss there is disparity in how these are delt with and always has been, it is worse to claim a dropped catch than it to ignore a nick off. Just seems right.
Batsmen have had the right to wait on the umpire's decision for a long time; fielders are not, on the other hand, permitted to deceive the umpire. The Aussies have been long practitioners of not walking so they can hardly complain but it makes me sad that the English tradition of fairplay in cricket is pretty much dead.
Associate
- Joined
- 17 Aug 2011
- Posts
- 256
- Location
- Leeds, Leeds, Leeds
Excellent day, sat outside all afternoon in a beer garden watching the big screen, no sympathy with the Broad incident - didn't see any Aussies calling Trott back in, nor Agar walking when he'd been stumped, they get two reviews, if they've wasted them, hey ho.
From what I saw, hot spot didn't seem to pick much up anyway, so if they had have had a review, guess it would've been turned down. Big day tomorrow, Bell's done really well today
From what I saw, hot spot didn't seem to pick much up anyway, so if they had have had a review, guess it would've been turned down. Big day tomorrow, Bell's done really well today
Associate
- Joined
- 17 Aug 2011
- Posts
- 256
- Location
- Leeds, Leeds, Leeds
Listening to Boycott this morning, he was saying that England had every right to be annoyed at the decisions, but that they had to get on with the game, as Australia would no doubt get some poor decisions some time in the series.
Soldato
- Joined
- 19 Apr 2004
- Posts
- 4,793
- Location
- London
Sorry, what?
You think that batsmen should be banned for not walking when they should have been given out?
I think Ramdin was a little hard done by but to compare it to this is daft. There's a difference between deceiving an umpire and not owning up to your guilt. One is cheating, the other is arguably unsporting.
While there is a difference I think the argument is not completely without merit - you could argue that a batsman pretending he hasn't hit a ball is attempting to deceive an umpire in the same way that a fielder appealing for a catch he hasn't taken is. In both cases it is down to the umpire to make the decision and in both cases the perpetrator is in a position to strongly indicate the correct decision (out = walk off versus not out = don't appeal the catch )
Anyway, the Broad decision was hilarious because it was so blatantly out, the only thing I could think of was maybe because the keeper was up to the stumps the umpire thought it had balooned off the gloves. Either that or he was annoyed at being overruled the day before and thought he'd even it up, "take that you ****s!"
Overall I don't blame Broad for not walking as having seen the bad decisions the day before England probably felt they were due some luck in that regard. Logically if you think about it, as a batsman if you always walk when you are out then overall in your career you will probably get given out too many times because in addition to those walks you'll also get a few stinkers so you need to even it up somehow.
Yesterday was pretty much the only time I've ever been a bit disappointed to see an Aussie get out in the Ashes, a century on debut would have been an amazing story.
Anyway, the Broad decision was hilarious because it was so blatantly out, the only thing I could think of was maybe because the keeper was up to the stumps the umpire thought it had balooned off the gloves. Either that or he was annoyed at being overruled the day before and thought he'd even it up, "take that you ****s!"
Overall I don't blame Broad for not walking as having seen the bad decisions the day before England probably felt they were due some luck in that regard. Logically if you think about it, as a batsman if you always walk when you are out then overall in your career you will probably get given out too many times because in addition to those walks you'll also get a few stinkers so you need to even it up somehow.
Yesterday was pretty much the only time I've ever been a bit disappointed to see an Aussie get out in the Ashes, a century on debut would have been an amazing story.
Last edited: