The Cricket Thread 2016

[Villan For Life]

Wasn't the on field decision not out but it was referred then to the 3rd umpire?

I also remember Harmison doing something to Inzamam in a test match....I think the appeal then should have been withdrawn (it wasn't) as it should have been yesterday.

The thing that got me was Smith saying it was blatantly out - it was anything but blatant. He also said it was in the rules, which always make me chuckle, as they are called laws.

It's been suggested that most players don't know the finer points of the laws. I tend to agree.

[taylorsworkrate]

I really don't think the umpire should be able to use the slow mo replay in a situation such as Stokes dismissal. It gives a completely false impression of the event.

[olaftab]

It was absolutely the correct decision. There was active obstruction and therefore on appeal and umpire can decide. Normally if the umpire gives out you would, in cricket, expect the opposition captain to withdraw the appeal but yesterday and in the past both teams have been guilty of not doing that so no one has moral high ground on this.

[aev]

It was absolutely the correct decision. There was active obstruction and therefore on appeal and umpire can decide. Normally if the umpire gives out you would, in cricket, expect the opposition captain to withdraw the appeal but yesterday and in the past both teams have been guilty of not doing that so no one has moral high ground on this.

I disagree - I don't think it was wilful at all.

Of course the only one who really knows is Stokes.

[adrenachrome]

It was absolutely the correct decision. There was active obstruction and therefore on appeal and umpire can decide. Normally if the umpire gives out you would, in cricket, expect the opposition captain to withdraw the appeal but yesterday and in the past both teams have been guilty of not doing that so no one has moral high ground on this.

Given the ridiculous appealing that goes on nowadays in first class cricket, nobody has any right to the moral high ground. I have lost count of the times when somebody at Edgbaston has uttered in dismay something like "Don't embarass us" to an appeal from our team, and we are far from the worst offenders.

[paul_e]

Having now watched this a few times I'm still not sure, I can see the reasons to give it but I can see just as many not to.  On balance I'd expect the 3rd umpire to go with the on-field umpire for this so I'll edge slightly towards disappointed with the decision.

[spangley1812]

England will rest wicketkeeper Jos Buttler for the last three games of their five-match one-day international series against Australia.

They have called up fellow keeper Jonny Bairstow as his replacement.

Lancashire's Buttler struggled with the bat as Australia won the first two ODIs, making four and nought.

"It has become clear in the last couple of days that Jos will benefit from a break from cricket ahead of the winter tours," said coach Trevor Bayliss.

[PaulWinch again]

Absolutely the right decision to rest Buttler.

[UK Redsox]

It was absolutely the correct decision. There was active obstruction and therefore on appeal and umpire can decide. Normally if the umpire gives out you would, in cricket, expect the opposition captain to withdraw the appeal but yesterday and in the past both teams have been guilty of not doing that so no one has moral high ground on this.

Given the ridiculous appealing that goes on nowadays in first class cricket, nobody has any right to the moral high ground. I have lost count of the times when somebody at Edgbaston has uttered in dismay something like "Don't embarass us" to an appeal from our team, and we are far from the worst offenders.

I've posted this before.....

I think that all appealing should be done away with. You're either out or you're not, I don't understand why (other than because its tradition) that a team has to appeal.

If the umpire thinks that a player is out, they should just give them out immediately.

[PaulWinch again]

To be honest I think appealling is a major part of the spectacle of the game and has to stay in. It allows the crowd to get involved as well.

[paul_e]

To be honest I think appealling is a major part of the spectacle of the game and has to stay in. It allows the crowd to get involved as well.

I agree, and I also don't have a problem with Smith no withdrawing the appeal (I do have a problem with the 'blatently out' comment afterwards though, show some fucking humility).  My issue with this is that I just don't think, in real time, you can definitively say that he was intent on blocking the ball from hitting the stumps rather than intent on making sure the ball didn't hit him anywhere painful.

[tomd2103]

To be honest I think appealling is a major part of the spectacle of the game and has to stay in. It allows the crowd to get involved as well.

I agree, and I also don't have a problem with Smith no withdrawing the appeal (I do have a problem with the 'blatently out' comment afterwards though, show some fucking humility).  My issue with this is that I just don't think, in real time, you can definitively say that he was intent on blocking the ball from hitting the stumps rather than intent on making sure the ball didn't hit him anywhere painful.

Agree.  The real time and slow mo replays gave a completely different picture of the incident. 

[OzVilla]

It was absolutely the correct decision. There was active obstruction and therefore on appeal and umpire can decide. Normally if the umpire gives out you would, in cricket, expect the opposition captain to withdraw the appeal but yesterday and in the past both teams have been guilty of not doing that so no one has moral high ground on this.

Given the ridiculous appealing that goes on nowadays in first class cricket, nobody has any right to the moral high ground. I have lost count of the times when somebody at Edgbaston has uttered in dismay something like "Don't embarass us" to an appeal from our team, and we are far from the worst offenders.

I've posted this before.....

I think that all appealing should be done away with. You're either out or you're not, I don't understand why (other than because its tradition) that a team has to appeal.

If the umpire thinks that a player is out, they should just give them out immediately.

I love a big appeal, that splt second of either hope or fear that the decision is pending or your playing armchair umpire by giving a decision to then have the umpire on confirm it, it's one of the joys of watching.

As a former wicket keeper till my mid 20's and then slipper in later years a good team appeal was brilliant to be involved in.  If we thought the umpire was crap the word often went around the cordon that we were going up big time next time it rapped the pads - got some decisions go our way with it too.

[taylorsworkrate]

I must admit I'm not a huge fan of Broad playing for Nottinghamshire yesterday, after he was supposedly resting during the ODI's

[Villan For Life]

One day internationals and TMS means the return of Charles Dagnall to the airwaves. He is, by some distance, the worst cricket commentator around.