Quote from: john e on July 13, 2013, 08:05:08 AMQuote from: SashasGrandad on July 13, 2013, 08:03:07 AMQuote from: KevinGage on July 12, 2013, 11:56:06 PMIf all international players in world cricket agree a code whereby they walk if they know they've edged it, then maybe (and good luck in getting Australia to agree to that). Until that day, Broad was 110% in the right to do what he did today. Agree totally - Broad had every right to stand and wait for the umpire - as Sir Geoffrey pointed out very few Australians walk.These things even themselves out - Trott's decision etc.The only moral argument is England should not appear to give the impression that they need dodgy decisions to win. The Aussies appear to be trying their hardest to avoid this series being a walkover for England as some were predicting. Yes I'm hoping England win but I hope the Aussies put up some resistance. The Broad incident might help fire them up a bit.How does that argument stand up with Armstrong then ?If everyone is in tacit agreement there is no problem ?Unless Broad is blood doping or starts batting with a bionic arm there is no comparison there at all John.One bloke set out in just about every major event he entered to rig the outcome, the other guy gave an umpire enough time to make his own (inaccurate on this occasion) decision.
Quote from: SashasGrandad on July 13, 2013, 08:03:07 AMQuote from: KevinGage on July 12, 2013, 11:56:06 PMIf all international players in world cricket agree a code whereby they walk if they know they've edged it, then maybe (and good luck in getting Australia to agree to that). Until that day, Broad was 110% in the right to do what he did today. Agree totally - Broad had every right to stand and wait for the umpire - as Sir Geoffrey pointed out very few Australians walk.These things even themselves out - Trott's decision etc.The only moral argument is England should not appear to give the impression that they need dodgy decisions to win. The Aussies appear to be trying their hardest to avoid this series being a walkover for England as some were predicting. Yes I'm hoping England win but I hope the Aussies put up some resistance. The Broad incident might help fire them up a bit.How does that argument stand up with Armstrong then ?If everyone is in tacit agreement there is no problem ?
Quote from: KevinGage on July 12, 2013, 11:56:06 PMIf all international players in world cricket agree a code whereby they walk if they know they've edged it, then maybe (and good luck in getting Australia to agree to that). Until that day, Broad was 110% in the right to do what he did today. Agree totally - Broad had every right to stand and wait for the umpire - as Sir Geoffrey pointed out very few Australians walk.These things even themselves out - Trott's decision etc.The only moral argument is England should not appear to give the impression that they need dodgy decisions to win. The Aussies appear to be trying their hardest to avoid this series being a walkover for England as some were predicting. Yes I'm hoping England win but I hope the Aussies put up some resistance. The Broad incident might help fire them up a bit.
If all international players in world cricket agree a code whereby they walk if they know they've edged it, then maybe (and good luck in getting Australia to agree to that). Until that day, Broad was 110% in the right to do what he did today.
We're big favourites now, but it's still not over.
Not just the Trott dismissal, but Agar was definitely, definitely not in his ground when given not out on that stumping decision early in his innings, far as I'm concerned. The Aussies have benefited from some poor decisions in this match and now so have we
The Aussies have benefited from some poor decisions in this match and now so have we
All hail King Olaftab.
Quote from: Montbert on July 13, 2013, 01:29:26 PMAll hail King Olaftab.I like that Monty. I think I will have that for my user name if we can do a deal?