Click here for Cardiff City personalised gift shop
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 61 to 90 of 97

Thread: Cricket World cup

  1. #61

    Re: Cricket World cup

    Quote Originally Posted by dandywarhol View Post
    Umpire decision to award 6 runs for throw in that hit Stokes was wrong.The batsman hadn't crossed for the second run.So 5 runs should have been awarded and Stokes would not have been on strike.
    He dived into his crease the ball was deflected for 4.
    They did not run for a 3rd out of sportsmanship.
    The umpire had no other decision to make other than to signal a 4 plus the 2 completed runs.

  2. #62

    Re: Cricket World cup

    Quote Originally Posted by qccfc View Post
    Are people that attached to the counties. I mean in Wales the county attendances are poor. For all the talk on here for wanting to support Wales in Cricket, people do not support Wales in Cricket, or Glamorgan, or their local clubs.

    The franchise system works well in Australia and in Indian systems, and i do not think it will hurt to have a look at it in this country.

    Im a traditional cricket fan, i support Glamorgan I attend matches, i am not a fan of the 100. However i do feel that something has to be done to attract new fans to the game, especially in Wales.
    Yes, I am, anyway! I love county cricket. They need to get the game on freeview. While cricket is behind a paywall, nobody is going to care. You can't take the Sky money and then whine that nobody can see your game. God, I hate the ECB. Colin Graves and Giles Clarke, wouldn't wish them on the Jacks .

    I am not a fan of the City based franchise but I get it. I don't think it will work though, they've alienated the core cricket fans by telling them, they don't matter, the game isn't for them etc. Also, saying its to get the best players in the world over, except that they won't now be playing because it's at the same time as our test match summer. It's already a point of ridicule in the press and on social media.

    Australia has had a state system for as long as anyone can remember and India is absolutely cricket mad, so they could all play in tutus and tiaras and people would still come.

  3. #63

    Re: Cricket World cup

    Quote Originally Posted by dandywarhol View Post
    Umpire decision to award 6 runs for throw in that hit Stokes was wrong.The batsman hadn't crossed for the second run.So 5 runs should have been awarded and Stokes would not have been on strike.
    Of course they crossed for the 2nd run Ben Stokes was diving in to make his ground when it hit him. It was the correct and only decision.

  4. #64

    Re: Cricket World cup

    Quote Originally Posted by dandywarhol View Post
    Umpire decision to award 6 runs for throw in that hit Stokes was wrong.The batsman hadn't crossed for the second run.So 5 runs should have been awarded and Stokes would not have been on strike.
    As insider says, they could have kept running until the ball hit the boundary rope. The umpire was correct, and it was pretty good sportsmanship from Stokes to say, let's not run the third.

  5. #65

    Re: Cricket World cup

    Quote Originally Posted by Pedro de la Rosa View Post
    Yes, I am, anyway! I love county cricket. They need to get the game on freeview. While cricket is behind a paywall, nobody is going to care. You can't take the Sky money and then whine that nobody can see your game. God, I hate the ECB. Colin Graves and Giles Clarke, wouldn't wish them on the Jacks .

    I am not a fan of the City based franchise but I get it. I don't think it will work though, they've alienated the core cricket fans by telling them, they don't matter, the game isn't for them etc. Also, saying its to get the best players in the world over, except that they won't now be playing because it's at the same time as our test match summer. It's already a point of ridicule in the press and on social media.

    Australia has had a state system for as long as anyone can remember and India is absolutely cricket mad, so they could all play in tutus and tiaras and people would still come.
    I appreciate there are core cricket fans. However the game, in this area is in a downwards spiral. I dont think the ECB can sit back and let the game drift.

    The money over access to tv games is a difficult one. The 100 is going to be on free to air tv.

    What would we rather paid professional coaches working with children, or the ability to watch the game on tv.

  6. #66

    Re: Cricket World cup

    Quote Originally Posted by qccfc View Post
    I appreciate there are core cricket fans. However the game, in this area is in a downwards spiral. I dont think the ECB can sit back and let the game drift.

    The money over access to tv games is a difficult one. The 100 is going to be on free to air tv.

    What would we rather paid professional coaches working with children, or the ability to watch the game on tv.
    Some games are going to be on FTA TV.

    They ballsed up in 05. They should have kept it on c4 and grown the game after the hype. We might not even need the Sky money had they done it well. Ancient history now but they've got to get England on TV. Whether that's all ODIs/t20s or just the lesser sides playing England on TV, with the Ashes behind a paywall I don't know. It's an incredibly difficult decision. People don't get Sky to watch the ODIs though, in my belief, they're buying it to watch the tests. Perhaps C4 and Sky could split the revenue or something when they show games (like I presume they did for the WCF).

  7. #67

    Re: Cricket World cup

    Quote Originally Posted by Pedro de la Rosa View Post
    Some games are going to be on FTA TV.

    They ballsed up in 05. They should have kept it on c4 and grown the game after the hype. We might not even need the Sky money had they done it well. Ancient history now but they've got to get England on TV. Whether that's all ODIs/t20s or just the lesser sides playing England on TV, with the Ashes behind a paywall I don't know. It's an incredibly difficult decision. People don't get Sky to watch the ODIs though, in my belief, they're buying it to watch the tests. Perhaps C4 and Sky could split the revenue or something when they show games (like I presume they did for the WCF).
    With regards to the 100 and the city based system it will go one of 2 ways, it will either be a success or it will fail. Either way we will get a clear message from fans of cricket in this country, and whether it will attract new fans to the games. If it fails you still have the county system running, so no harm will be done.

    With regards to the tv money, i accept it is an extremely difficult decision. The money available for local clubs and the initiatives available for clubs is much greater than it was in 2005. However children in schools have little or no knowledge of cricket and cricketers. That being said Cardiff Cricket club are currently teaching 100 children aged 5-8 through the all stars system on a Friday night and Saturday morning, and thats just 1 club alone, many others in the region host smaller schemes.

  8. #68

    Re: Cricket World cup

    Quote Originally Posted by qccfc View Post
    With regards to the 100 and the city based system it will go one of 2 ways, it will either be a success or it will fail. Either way we will get a clear message from fans of cricket in this country, and whether it will attract new fans to the games. If it fails you still have the county system running, so no harm will be done.

    With regards to the tv money, i accept it is an extremely difficult decision. The money available for local clubs and the initiatives available for clubs is much greater than it was in 2005. However children in schools have little or no knowledge of cricket and cricketers. That being said Cardiff Cricket club are currently teaching 100 children aged 5-8 through the all stars system on a Friday night and Saturday morning, and thats just 1 club alone, many others in the region host smaller schemes.
    The harm is, they've devalued the 50 over competition, which people still go to. How have we just won a world cup and then not even bothering with the 50 over game back home? It is lunacy.

  9. #69

    Re: Cricket World cup

    Quote Originally Posted by Pedro de la Rosa View Post
    The harm is, they've devalued the 50 over competition, which people still go to. How have we just won a world cup and then not even bothering with the 50 over game back home? It is lunacy.
    The 50 over format has been constantly changing, from 40 to 50, from the pro40 to the one day cup to the Sunday League. The international game will remain the same, attendances for the one day cup for Glamorgan were not great.

    The Counties want shorter format games. T20 is where they make their money, and without that money they are dependent on ECB funding, and that funding comes from SKY.

    We need to answer the question of whether 9 big city based teams will bring in the crowds better than the 16 counties. Until we try that the question will remain and hang over the game.

  10. #70

    Re: Cricket World cup

    Quote Originally Posted by qccfc View Post
    The 50 over format has been constantly changing, from 40 to 50, from the pro40 to the one day cup to the Sunday League. The international game will remain the same, attendances for the one day cup for Glamorgan were not great.

    The Counties want shorter format games. T20 is where they make their money, and without that money they are dependent on ECB funding, and that funding comes from SKY.

    We need to answer the question of whether 9 big city based teams will bring in the crowds better than the 16 counties. Until we try that the question will remain and hang over the game.
    8 City based teams isn't it? The whole thing has been an utter disaster from a PR point of view and they're going to ruin a potentially good thing. Also, the team names are the worst things I've ever seen. The Leeds Supercharges, Manchester Originals. What the hell is that

  11. #71

    Re: Cricket World cup

    Quote Originally Posted by Pedro de la Rosa View Post
    8 City based teams isn't it? The whole thing has been an utter disaster from a PR point of view and they're going to ruin a potentially good thing. Also, the team names are the worst things I've ever seen. The Leeds Supercharges, Manchester Originals. What the hell is that
    Yeah 8 teams, i was thinking of the 9 test grounds. Its going to be put down by the traditional cricket fans, so was T20.

  12. #72

    Re: Cricket World cup

    Quote Originally Posted by qccfc View Post
    Yeah 8 teams, i was thinking of the 9 test grounds. Its going to be put down by the traditional cricket fans, so was T20.
    T20 was always going to work, it's what everyone played for starters at club level for ages. Durham have lost their test status, due to the ECB making them push and then punishing them for pushing for test status.

  13. #73

  14. #74

    Re: Cricket World cup

    Quote Originally Posted by dandywarhol View Post

    You are correct. There is photographic evidence to show that at the point the ball was thrown they had not crossed. It should have been five runs with Rashid and not Stokes facing the strike.

  15. #75

    Re: Cricket World cup

    Quote Originally Posted by Pearcey3 View Post
    You are correct. There is photographic evidence to show that at the point the ball was thrown they had not crossed. It should have been five runs with Rashid and not Stokes facing the strike.
    Farcical really when you think of all the technology that has been brought into cricket with the focus on getting decisions right.
    There is no excuse for such an error and the umpire should have gone upstairs straight away. They even go upstairs for things like run out appeals blatantly obvious to the naked eye that the batsmen have made their ground.

    Even though I am glad that England won, I would not be happy at all if I was a New Zealander.
    Would such a decision have been allowed had it been Australia the opposition and not "little" New Zealand?

  16. #76

    Re: Cricket World cup

    Quote Originally Posted by MacAdder View Post
    Farcical really when you think of all the technology that has been brought into cricket with the focus on getting decisions right.
    There is no excuse for such an error and the umpire should have gone upstairs straight away. They even go upstairs for things like run out appeals blatantly obvious to the naked eye that the batsmen have made their ground.

    Even though I am glad that England won, I would not be happy at all if I was a New Zealander.
    Would such a decision have been allowed had it been Australia the opposition and not "little" New Zealand?
    The catch which won England that classic test at Edgbaston by two runs back in 2005 over Australia shouldn't have been allowed, but with all that was going on you would have needed to be an exceptional umpire to have noticed why.

    I'm not going to take out an Independent subscription just to read that article, what does the relevant rule say about what happened yesterday?

  17. #77

    Re: Cricket World cup

    Quote Originally Posted by the other bob wilson View Post
    The catch which won England that classic test at Edgbaston by two runs back in 2005 over Australia shouldn't have been allowed, but with all that was going on you would have needed to be an exceptional umpire to have noticed why.

    I'm not going to take out an Independent subscription just to read that article, what does the relevant rule say about what happened yesterday?
    Apparently the batsman must have crossed at the time the ball left the fielders hand, and they hadn't. A overthrow starts when it leaves the bowlers hand.

    Its not a rule i was aware of, i would have thought that as Stoke completed 2 runs on the deflection, and another 4 followed it would be the 6 runs.

    Its also difficult for the umpire to judge that at that moment.

  18. #78

    Re: Cricket World cup

    Quote Originally Posted by the other bob wilson View Post
    The catch which won England that classic test at Edgbaston by two runs back in 2005 over Australia shouldn't have been allowed, but with all that was going on you would have needed to be an exceptional umpire to have noticed why.

    I'm not going to take out an Independent subscription just to read that article, what does the relevant rule say about what happened yesterday?
    The technology from memory was nowhere near as advanced as it is today even though it was a mere 14 years ago Bob so you could forgive the umpires there.

    I am not subscribing either but the gist in the article is that a "top umpire" has said that Stokes had not crossed when the throw came in and the six runs awarded should have been five and Rashid would have been on strike for the next ball.

  19. #79

    Re: Cricket World cup

    Quote Originally Posted by qccfc View Post
    Apparently the batsman must have crossed at the time the ball left the fielders hand, and they hadn't. A overthrow starts when it leaves the bowlers hand.

    Its not a rule i was aware of, i would have thought that as Stoke completed 2 runs on the deflection, and another 4 followed it would be the 6 runs.

    Its also difficult for the umpire to judge that at that moment.
    The wording of the law is at the bottom of this piece;-

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/48991962

    What does "or act" mean I wonder?

  20. #80

    Re: Cricket World cup

    Quote Originally Posted by MacAdder View Post
    Would such a decision have been allowed had it been Australia the opposition and not "little" New Zealand?
    Yes. Clearly. Marais Erasmus is an incredible umpire for starters. They got caught up in the carnage, everyone did. It's easy to spot it 12 hours after the game has finished.

    Also, Stokes effectively blocked the last ball for a single as he didn't want to risk getting out, you could even make a point and say England might have won the game if Stokes needed a 4 off the last ball cos he'd have to play an attacking shot. I bet in the NZ innings you can find them getting away with a clear no ball, or a marginal wide etc. Sport isn't, and shouldn't be, an exact science.

  21. #81

    Re: Cricket World cup

    Quote Originally Posted by qccfc View Post
    Apparently the batsman must have crossed at the time the ball left the fielders hand, and they hadn't. A overthrow starts when it leaves the bowlers hand.

    Its not a rule i was aware of, i would have thought that as Stoke completed 2 runs on the deflection, and another 4 followed it would be the 6 runs.

    [bold] Its also difficult for the umpire to judge that at that moment. [/bold]
    [/QUOTE]

    In such an unusual scenario and in such a crucial play he could easily have gone upstairs to check and nobody would have blamed him.

  22. #82

    Re: Cricket World cup

    In such an unusual scenario and in such a crucial play he could easily have gone upstairs to check and nobody would have blamed him.[/QUOTE]

    The third umpire is watching all the time, and they were all clearly talking for a long time after the issue. I would imagine that all 3 umpires and the players were unaware of the exact ruling on this point.

  23. #83

    Re: Cricket World cup

    Quote Originally Posted by MacAdder View Post
    In such an unusual scenario and in such a crucial play he could easily have gone upstairs to check and nobody would have blamed him.
    How often does this happen? These are the best 3 officials in the world, it isn't a conspiracy theory. There's no guarantee Stokes doesn't take England home if they need one more to win.

  24. #84

    Re: Cricket World cup

    Quote Originally Posted by insider View Post
    He dived into his crease the ball was deflected for 4.
    They did not run for a 3rd out of sportsmanship.
    The umpire had no other decision to make other than to signal a 4 plus the 2 completed runs.
    The test is whether they had crossed when the ball was thrown, which they clearly had not.

    It's obviously a pretty obscure part of the rules so I can well see how the umpire got it wrong, but he did get it wrong. They should have had the four runs from the overthrow, plus the runs completed (1); plus the run in progress if the batters had crossed when the ball was thrown. So 5.

    But these things happen. The final ball would have played out differently had Stokes needed to hit a boundary and who is to say whether he would have managed it?

  25. #85

    Re: Cricket World cup

    Quote Originally Posted by Optimistic Nick View Post
    The test is whether they had crossed when the ball was thrown, which they clearly had not.

    It's obviously a pretty obscure part of the rules so I can well see how the umpire got it wrong, but he did get it wrong. They should have had the four runs from the overthrow, plus the runs completed (1); plus the run in progress if the batters had crossed when the ball was thrown. So 5.

    But these things happen. The final ball would have played out differently had Stokes needed to hit a boundary and who is to say whether he would have managed it?
    They would have needed 4 off 2 balls and 3 for the tie instead of 3 and 2.

    They played the last 2 balls a sure singles with run outs going for 2s. The mentality would have been different maybe a bigger shot needed, but it still could have gone either way.

  26. #86

    Re: Cricket World cup

    Quote Originally Posted by Optimistic Nick View Post
    The test is whether they had crossed when the ball was thrown, which they clearly had not.

    It's obviously a pretty obscure part of the rules so I can well see how the umpire got it wrong, but he did get it wrong. They should have had the four runs from the overthrow, plus the runs completed (1); plus the run in progress if the batters had crossed when the ball was thrown. So 5.

    But these things happen. The final ball would have played out differently had Stokes needed to hit a boundary and who is to say whether he would have managed it?
    No, if they got 5, Stokes would still have pushed the ball into the leg side to get 1 run. Obviously getting 5 or 6 made NO impact whatsoever on his shot selection.

  27. #87

    Re: Cricket World cup

    Quote Originally Posted by Optimistic Nick View Post
    The test is whether they had crossed when the ball was thrown, which they clearly had not.

    It's obviously a pretty obscure part of the rules so I can well see how the umpire got it wrong, but he did get it wrong. They should have had the four runs from the overthrow, plus the runs completed (1); plus the run in progress if the batters had crossed when the ball was thrown. So 5.

    But these things happen. The final ball would have played out differently had Stokes needed to hit a boundary and who is to say whether he would have managed it?

    The point being it would have been Rashid on strike and not Stokes as they had only completed one run. It was a huge error by the umpires. It should have been four wanted off two with Rashid to face and not three off two with Stokes facing. They should have been aware of the rules and checked.

  28. #88

    Re: Cricket World cup

    Quote Originally Posted by Pedro de la Rosa View Post
    No, if they got 5, Stokes would still have pushed the ball into the leg side to get 1 run. Obviously getting 5 or 6 made NO impact whatsoever on his shot selection.
    Stokes wouldn't have been on strike if it was 5.

  29. #89

    Re: Cricket World cup

    Quote Originally Posted by Pedro de la Rosa View Post
    No, if they got 5, Stokes would still have pushed the ball into the leg side to get 1 run. Obviously getting 5 or 6 made NO impact whatsoever on his shot selection.
    But he wouldnt have been on strike?

  30. #90

    Re: Cricket World cup

    Quote Originally Posted by qccfc View Post
    Stokes wouldn't have been on strike if it was 5.
    They'd have played tip and run with Stokes needing 2 to draw off the last. Who's to say what would have happened?

    If you go through their innings, I'm sure you can find a no ball that NZ bowled that didn't get called, a wide that was harshly given or not given. These things happen.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •