Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

The Ashes 2023

Umpire thought the ball was dead as he was reaching for the bowler's cap.

But Carey threw the ball before that moment. It was one movement from catching the ball to throwing it at the stumps. I think it has to be given out. Dozy from Bairstow not to even look.
 
Umpire thought the ball was dead as he was reaching for the bowler's cap.

But Carey threw the ball before that moment. It was one movement from catching the ball to throwing it at the stumps. I think it has to be given out. Dozy from Bairstow not to even look.
Aye, this. What was interesting was the keeper knew what was coming. Not very, ahem, 'sporting', but good thinking.
 
Tbf I think Bairstow was out but I also sympathise that he thought the over was, well, over, as did I when watching it. Complacency I suppose.

However I am enjoying a rowdy Lords, an angry Broad and a riled up Stokes :D!!!
 
Well, this could be the greatest game ever... or it could be over in 20 minutes.
 
Bairstow was definitely out according to the laws of the game. But in a five-day match, there are certain unspoken social conventions. If every single obvious thing required slow and deliberate checking, the over rate would be even slower than it is and the game would become much more tedious. In my book, it’s okay that players, for example, have the unspoken agreement that they all just know the ball is dead and get on with it, without requiring the umpire to declare it every ball. Breaking that kind of social convention is even worse than cheating the law of the game, as far as I’m concerned. Winning by acting against the spirit of the game is no win at all.
 
I guessing he’s bringing out the feistiness to banish the demons from being hit again.
I think that he’s relishing the role of winding up the Aussies for being dirty cheats, and that’s totally made him forget to be scared.
 
Bairstow was definitely out according to the laws of the game. But in a five-day match, there are certain unspoken social conventions. If every single obvious thing required slow and deliberate checking, the over rate would be even slower than it is and the game would become much more tedious. In my book, it’s okay that players, for example, have the unspoken agreement that they all just know the ball is dead and get on with it, without requiring the umpire to declare it every ball. Breaking that kind of social convention is even worse than cheating the law of the game, as far as I’m concerned. Winning by acting against the spirit of the game is no win at all.
Did he get (or thought he got) some kind of confirmation from the umpire? He kind of drew his toe across the crease while looking at the umpire?
 
I've been out of the loop for the last couple of days.

Why doesn't Stokes produce performances like this all the time? Seems to be only in the most dramatic of circumstances he ups his games (and gets the headlines)
 
Did he get (or thought he got) some kind of confirmation from the umpire? He kind of drew his toe across the crease while looking at the umpire?
Well quite. That’s the batsman signalling that he’s done for that ball. What, they want him to wait around for extra time after every ball just to prove the point? It’s the kind of thing that turns supporters off. In a world in which test cricket is having to prove its worth (and in which England are doing their best to be entertaining), taking this kind of approach is a real own goal.
 
Am I right in thinking this would be the second highest England chase of all time? After Stokes' last effort against Pakistan?
 
Win or lose, point made. This is what cricket looks like. Not being a sneaky, mean-spirited little cunt and stealing an advantage you've not earned. This.

Stokes has to the most insane captain ever. But I really hope it pays off this time.
 
Back
Top Bottom