FootballNews

It is currently Fri Aug 17, 2018 10:04 am

All times are UTC + 9:30 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 76 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: ODI's
PostPosted: Mon Jan 15, 2018 12:19 pm 
Offline
Technical Director
Technical Director
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 08, 2009 6:31 pm
Posts: 41768
Great start to them and what a knock by Jason Roy.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: ODI's
PostPosted: Mon Jan 15, 2018 1:00 pm 
Offline
Board Member
Board Member
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 04, 2006 12:40 pm
Posts: 51599
Location: Between the lake and the beach
Crowd got their money's worth, over 600 runs.

This bloke has struggled in BBL (supposedly, don't watch it much) but obvious question is what's he like at the long form of the game?

_________________
Ignore this signature


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: ODI's
PostPosted: Mon Jan 15, 2018 1:24 pm 
Offline
Technical Director
Technical Director
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 08, 2009 6:31 pm
Posts: 41768
Bomber wrote:
Crowd got their money's worth, over 600 runs.

This bloke has struggled in BBL (supposedly, don't watch it much) but obvious question is what's he like at the long form of the game?


Inconsistent.

Had his chance and failed a few times. Similar to Warner, when he fires he's quality but fails a few times too many.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: ODI's
PostPosted: Mon Jan 15, 2018 1:44 pm 
Offline
Board Member
Board Member
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 04, 2006 12:40 pm
Posts: 51599
Location: Between the lake and the beach
God is an Englishman wrote:
Bomber wrote:
Crowd got their money's worth, over 600 runs.

This bloke has struggled in BBL (supposedly, don't watch it much) but obvious question is what's he like at the long form of the game?


Inconsistent.

Had his chance and failed a few times. Similar to Warner, when he fires he's quality but fails a few times too many.


So this dig was a fluke.

_________________
Ignore this signature


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: ODI's
PostPosted: Mon Jan 15, 2018 5:31 pm 
Offline
Technical Director
Technical Director
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 08, 2009 6:31 pm
Posts: 41768
Bomber wrote:
God is an Englishman wrote:
Bomber wrote:
Crowd got their money's worth, over 600 runs.

This bloke has struggled in BBL (supposedly, don't watch it much) but obvious question is what's he like at the long form of the game?


Inconsistent.

Had his chance and failed a few times. Similar to Warner, when he fires he's quality but fails a few times too many.


So this dig was a fluke.


No, definitely no but you were asking about his ability in the long form of the game. Very good player and I thought he deserved a spot in the test side but he has failed a bit recently. Scores a lot of runs in the shorter games though.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: ODI's
PostPosted: Mon Jan 22, 2018 10:14 am 
Offline
Bench Warmer
Bench Warmer

Joined: Mon Mar 15, 2010 3:36 pm
Posts: 665
England win again but the game will be remembered for the terrible third umpire decision with the Smith dismissal. How could they get it so wrong, it was clear to all watching that the ball deflected into the ground then back into the glove. They need to get rid of the soft call with these types of appeal/wickets


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: ODI's
PostPosted: Mon Jan 22, 2018 10:38 am 
Offline
Board Member
Board Member
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 04, 2006 12:40 pm
Posts: 51599
Location: Between the lake and the beach
Cooper wrote:
England win again but the game will be remembered for the terrible third umpire decision with the Smith dismissal. How could they get it so wrong, it was clear to all watching that the ball deflected into the ground then back into the glove. They need to get rid of the soft call with these types of appeal/wickets


Yet if an Aussie did it, well, cheat this, cheat that.........

_________________
Ignore this signature


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: ODI's
PostPosted: Mon Jan 22, 2018 12:10 pm 
Offline
Technical Director
Technical Director
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 08, 2009 6:31 pm
Posts: 41768
Cooper wrote:
England win again but the game will be remembered for the terrible third umpire decision with the Smith dismissal. How could they get it so wrong, it was clear to all watching that the ball deflected into the ground then back into the glove. They need to get rid of the soft call with these types of appeal/wickets


It wasn't clear to all at all, fair catch. I don't remember smith saying anything about the soft dismissal when Broad was given out.

It may also be remembered for the allegation of ball tampering on smith as well.

Or maybe it will be remembered for such a slow over rate that Smith was fined and given a first warning.

Ot remembered for England winning the series.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: ODI's
PostPosted: Mon Jan 22, 2018 12:43 pm 
Offline
Bench Warmer
Bench Warmer

Joined: Mon Mar 15, 2010 3:36 pm
Posts: 665
God is an Englishman wrote:
Cooper wrote:
England win again but the game will be remembered for the terrible third umpire decision with the Smith dismissal. How could they get it so wrong, it was clear to all watching that the ball deflected into the ground then back into the glove. They need to get rid of the soft call with these types of appeal/wickets


It wasn't clear to all at all, fair catch. I don't remember smith saying anything about the soft dismissal when Broad was given out.

It may also be remembered for the allegation of ball tampering on smith as well.

Or maybe it will be remembered for such a slow over rate that Smith was fined and given a first warning.

Ot remembered for England winning the series.


You can see in the slow mo that it hits the glove deflects into the ground and then back to the glove, blind Freddie could see that it was a dropped catch.

As for the other stuff I either don't care or don't know enough about it.

But yes England won the series with that game. Cant deny their dominance in the ODI's at the moment


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: ODI's
PostPosted: Mon Jan 22, 2018 1:04 pm 
Offline
Technical Director
Technical Director
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 08, 2009 6:31 pm
Posts: 41768
No you can't. It's just like the Khawaja one, not enough evidence to overturn.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: ODI's
PostPosted: Mon Jan 22, 2018 1:49 pm 
Offline
Board Member
Board Member
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 04, 2006 12:40 pm
Posts: 51599
Location: Between the lake and the beach
God is an Englishman wrote:
No you can't. It's just like the Khawaja one, not enough evidence to overturn.


I think more pertinent is the fact that in both cases, the on field umpires gave it out albeit "softly". How they can give both out when the laws of the game generally say benefit of the doubt goes to batsman when to the human eye they wouldn't have had a clue. I reckon in each case they just went with the "confidence of appeal" as the default position, which to me is wrong. If you don't know for sure, then its not out. If you know for sure, then why call for a replay as they did to begin with?

_________________
Ignore this signature


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: ODI's
PostPosted: Mon Jan 22, 2018 3:09 pm 
Offline
Technical Director
Technical Director
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 08, 2009 6:31 pm
Posts: 41768
Bomber wrote:
God is an Englishman wrote:
No you can't. It's just like the Khawaja one, not enough evidence to overturn.


I think more pertinent is the fact that in both cases, the on field umpires gave it out albeit "softly". How they can give both out when the laws of the game generally say benefit of the doubt goes to batsman when to the human eye they wouldn't have had a clue. I reckon in each case they just went with the "confidence of appeal" as the default position, which to me is wrong. If you don't know for sure, then its not out. If you know for sure, then why call for a replay as they did to begin with?


My opinion is that on both ocassions technology has not been able to prove either way. Had technology not been available then the same decision would have been made.

What you seem to be saying is akin to getting rid of umpires and using technology completely. Shall we get rid of all "umpires call" while we're at it?

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: ODI's
PostPosted: Mon Jan 22, 2018 3:38 pm 
Offline
Board Member
Board Member
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 04, 2006 12:40 pm
Posts: 51599
Location: Between the lake and the beach
God is an Englishman wrote:
Bomber wrote:
God is an Englishman wrote:
No you can't. It's just like the Khawaja one, not enough evidence to overturn.


I think more pertinent is the fact that in both cases, the on field umpires gave it out albeit "softly". How they can give both out when the laws of the game generally say benefit of the doubt goes to batsman when to the human eye they wouldn't have had a clue. I reckon in each case they just went with the "confidence of appeal" as the default position, which to me is wrong. If you don't know for sure, then its not out. If you know for sure, then why call for a replay as they did to begin with?


My opinion is that on both ocassions technology has not been able to prove either way. Had technology not been available then the same decision would have been made.

What you seem to be saying is akin to getting rid of umpires and using technology completely. Shall we get rid of all "umpires call" while we're at it?


Quite the opposite really. Ditch technology and accept that umpires and players are all human and will make mistakes. Like football referees, I've always said I don't blame them for missing things, but I get pissed when they "see" something that never happened.

If technology must be used, then let the third umpire intervene on his own accord (no review request allowances etc etc) ONLY IF a clear 100% wrong decision has been made and it doesn't take 5 minutes of slow motion replays back and forth (suggesting enough doubt anyway).

_________________
Ignore this signature


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: ODI's
PostPosted: Mon Jan 22, 2018 6:50 pm 
Offline
Promising Junior
Promising Junior
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 06, 2013 7:25 pm
Posts: 264
Bomber wrote:
How they can give both out when the laws of the game generally say benefit of the doubt goes to batsman


You assume the umpire was in doubt. Maybe they were sure of what they saw (whether it was right or wrong).

*I haven't seen either, just saying in the umpires' mind there probably was no doubt


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: ODI's
PostPosted: Tue Jan 23, 2018 9:26 am 
Offline
Board Member
Board Member
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 04, 2006 12:40 pm
Posts: 51599
Location: Between the lake and the beach
Jørgen Inge Mykland wrote:
Bomber wrote:
How they can give both out when the laws of the game generally say benefit of the doubt goes to batsman


You assume the umpire was in doubt. Maybe they were sure of what they saw (whether it was right or wrong).

*I haven't seen either, just saying in the umpires' mind there probably was no doubt


If there was no doubt whatsoever, and no reviews left, then they should just say its out and be done with it. Players then must accept it and get on with it.

_________________
Ignore this signature


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: ODI's
PostPosted: Tue Jan 23, 2018 11:12 am 
Offline
Technical Director
Technical Director
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 08, 2009 6:31 pm
Posts: 41768
Bomber wrote:

Quite the opposite really. Ditch technology and accept that umpires and players are all human and will make mistakes. Like football referees, I've always said I don't blame them for missing things, but I get pissed when they "see" something that never happened.

If technology must be used, then let the third umpire intervene on his own accord (no review request allowances etc etc) ONLY IF a clear 100% wrong decision has been made and it doesn't take 5 minutes of slow motion replays back and forth (suggesting enough doubt anyway).


So in that case, Smith would have been out anyway. What are you whingeing about?

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: ODI's
PostPosted: Tue Jan 23, 2018 11:13 am 
Offline
Technical Director
Technical Director
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 08, 2009 6:31 pm
Posts: 41768
Can you also show me the law that says benefit of doubt to the batsmen?

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: ODI's
PostPosted: Tue Jan 23, 2018 11:38 am 
Offline
Board Member
Board Member
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 04, 2006 12:40 pm
Posts: 51599
Location: Between the lake and the beach
God is an Englishman wrote:
Bomber wrote:

Quite the opposite really. Ditch technology and accept that umpires and players are all human and will make mistakes. Like football referees, I've always said I don't blame them for missing things, but I get pissed when they "see" something that never happened.

If technology must be used, then let the third umpire intervene on his own accord (no review request allowances etc etc) ONLY IF a clear 100% wrong decision has been made and it doesn't take 5 minutes of slow motion replays back and forth (suggesting enough doubt anyway).


So in that case, Smith would have been out anyway. What are you whingeing about?


Who's whingeing? Why didn't the finger go up straight away? I'll answer - he had no idea, hung around, looked confused, took soft option and called for replay and given Buttler's "I caught it" celebration gave it a "soft out".

_________________
Ignore this signature


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: ODI's
PostPosted: Tue Jan 23, 2018 11:45 am 
Offline
Board Member
Board Member
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 04, 2006 12:40 pm
Posts: 51599
Location: Between the lake and the beach
God is an Englishman wrote:
Can you also show me the law that says benefit of doubt to the batsmen?


Its probably no law, but even you know about the spirit of the game and how its been umpired for 150 years. If you're uncertain about a wicket, then its not out, not "maybe out".

_________________
Ignore this signature


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: ODI's
PostPosted: Tue Jan 23, 2018 2:24 pm 
Offline
Technical Director
Technical Director
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 08, 2009 6:31 pm
Posts: 41768
Bomber wrote:
So in that case, Smith would have been out anyway. What are you whingeing about?


Who's whingeing? Why didn't the finger go up straight away? I'll answer - he had no idea, hung around, looked confused, took soft option and called for replay and given Buttler's "I caught it" celebration gave it a "soft out".[/quote]

Well what would you call what you are doing, still going on about a correct decision.

Well he did have an idea, that's why he gave the soft dismissal as out. Replays confirmed it. Pavillion's that way Smith, now shiraz off. Smith didn't seem to complain when Broad was given out the same way. Smith is in no position to complain after his antics recently.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: ODI's
PostPosted: Tue Jan 23, 2018 2:42 pm 
Offline
Promising Junior
Promising Junior

Joined: Thu May 05, 2011 7:38 pm
Posts: 411
Location: Queens
We have finally beaten England in an ODI! - albeit at the U/19 World Cup

Defending 127, the Aussie leg-spinner took 8/35 to skittle the English for less than 100.
Lloyd Pope - remember the name!

_________________
WHO TOOK MY TV GUIDE???


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: ODI's
PostPosted: Tue Jan 23, 2018 2:43 pm 
Offline
Board Member
Board Member
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 04, 2006 12:40 pm
Posts: 51599
Location: Between the lake and the beach
Replays did NOT confirm it.

Why didn't the finger go up straight away, even after a few seconds? That's what umpires usually do if they know a batsman is definitely out.

_________________
Ignore this signature


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: ODI's
PostPosted: Tue Jan 23, 2018 2:46 pm 
Offline
Technical Director
Technical Director
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 08, 2009 6:31 pm
Posts: 41768
Bomber wrote:
Replays did NOT confirm it.

Why didn't the finger go up straight away, even after a few seconds? That's what umpires usually do if they know a batsman is definitely out.



Because the umpires confer, together they discussed it and agreed they believed it to be out. However, to be sure it is then checked. Replays then did not show any proof to change that opinion. As you would know these days, umpires are frightened to make any decisions.

Did you complain like this when Broad was given out?

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: ODI's
PostPosted: Tue Jan 23, 2018 2:59 pm 
Offline
Board Member
Board Member
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 04, 2006 12:40 pm
Posts: 51599
Location: Between the lake and the beach
God is an Englishman wrote:
Bomber wrote:
Replays did NOT confirm it.

Why didn't the finger go up straight away, even after a few seconds? That's what umpires usually do if they know a batsman is definitely out.



Because the umpires confer, together they discussed it and agreed they believed it to be out. However, to be sure it is then checked. Replays then did not show any proof to change that opinion. As you would know these days, umpires are frightened to make any decisions.

Did you complain like this when Broad was given out?


Why would I when I know you'd be on to it quicker than a fly on a newly laid cabernet?

Fact is, I didn't think he (Broad) should have been given out.

Maybe its like when footballers dive all the time - they get a legitimate foul against them so the ref waves play on based on history, even if its wrong. Sometimes they have to suck it up, which Smith (and Broad) eventually did. Swings and roundabouts as they say.

Whilst we're on it, do you think DRS and/or the use of technology as a whole has :
a) made umpires better
b) reduced controversy
c) enhanced the flow of the game

_________________
Ignore this signature


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: ODI's
PostPosted: Tue Jan 23, 2018 3:09 pm 
Offline
Technical Director
Technical Director
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 08, 2009 6:31 pm
Posts: 41768
Bomber wrote:
God is an Englishman wrote:
Bomber wrote:
Replays did NOT confirm it.

Why didn't the finger go up straight away, even after a few seconds? That's what umpires usually do if they know a batsman is definitely out.



Because the umpires confer, together they discussed it and agreed they believed it to be out. However, to be sure it is then checked. Replays then did not show any proof to change that opinion. As you would know these days, umpires are frightened to make any decisions.

Did you complain like this when Broad was given out?


Why would I when I know you'd be on to it quicker than a fly on a newly laid cabernet?

Fact is, I didn't think he (Broad) should have been given out.

Maybe its like when footballers dive all the time - they get a legitimate foul against them so the ref waves play on based on history, even if its wrong. Sometimes they have to suck it up, which Smith (and Broad) eventually did. Swings and roundabouts as they say.

Whilst we're on it, do you think DRS and/or the use of technology as a whole has :
a) made umpires better
b) reduced controversy
c) enhanced the flow of the game


I actually agree with you, it's strange when you're at the ground and you celebrate a wicket only to have it over turned. Get rid of it but allow the 3rd umpire to check if he feels it's relevant.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: ODI's
PostPosted: Tue Jan 23, 2018 3:09 pm 
Offline
Technical Director
Technical Director
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 08, 2009 6:31 pm
Posts: 41768
Bomber wrote:
God is an Englishman wrote:
Bomber wrote:
Replays did NOT confirm it.

Why didn't the finger go up straight away, even after a few seconds? That's what umpires usually do if they know a batsman is definitely out.



Because the umpires confer, together they discussed it and agreed they believed it to be out. However, to be sure it is then checked. Replays then did not show any proof to change that opinion. As you would know these days, umpires are frightened to make any decisions.

Did you complain like this when Broad was given out?


Why would I when I know you'd be on to it quicker than a fly on a newly laid cabernet?

Fact is, I didn't think he (Broad) should have been given out.

Maybe its like when footballers dive all the time - they get a legitimate foul against them so the ref waves play on based on history, even if its wrong. Sometimes they have to suck it up, which Smith (and Broad) eventually did. Swings and roundabouts as they say.

Whilst we're on it, do you think DRS and/or the use of technology as a whole has :
a) made umpires better
b) reduced controversy
c) enhanced the flow of the game


I actually agree with you, it's strange when you're at the ground and you celebrate a wicket only to have it over turned. Get rid of it but allow the 3rd umpire to check if he feels it's relevant.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: ODI's
PostPosted: Thu Jan 25, 2018 11:21 am 
Offline
Board Member
Board Member
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 04, 2006 12:40 pm
Posts: 51599
Location: Between the lake and the beach
Going tomorrow?

I'm watching from pub - no corporate box this time.

_________________
Ignore this signature


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: ODI's
PostPosted: Thu Jan 25, 2018 2:57 pm 
Offline
Technical Director
Technical Director
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 08, 2009 6:31 pm
Posts: 41768
Bomber wrote:
Going tomorrow?

I'm watching from pub - no corporate box this time.


Of course I am going.

Obviously, there's a fair few tickets going spare, they're even offering BOGOF tickets, that's how bad sales are. Adelaide Barmies meeting at 10am in the pub :-)

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: ODI's
PostPosted: Thu Jan 25, 2018 3:57 pm 
Offline
Board Member
Board Member
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 04, 2006 12:40 pm
Posts: 51599
Location: Between the lake and the beach
God is an Englishman wrote:
Bomber wrote:
Going tomorrow?

I'm watching from pub - no corporate box this time.


Of course I am going.

Obviously, there's a fair few tickets going spare, they're even offering BOGOF tickets, that's how bad sales are. Adelaide Barmies meeting at 10am in the pub :-)


I hope you lot can hold your liquor and behave this time. :wink:

_________________
Ignore this signature


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: ODI's
PostPosted: Thu Jan 25, 2018 7:31 pm 
Offline
Technical Director
Technical Director
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 08, 2009 6:31 pm
Posts: 41768
Bomber wrote:
God is an Englishman wrote:
Bomber wrote:
Going tomorrow?

I'm watching from pub - no corporate box this time.


Of course I am going.

Obviously, there's a fair few tickets going spare, they're even offering BOGOF tickets, that's how bad sales are. Adelaide Barmies meeting at 10am in the pub :-)


I hope you lot can hold your liquor and behave this time. :wink:


Got a spare members pass if you want it, real fans go to games.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 76 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next

All times are UTC + 9:30 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group