Official Ashes Thread

[Hilts]

Re: Official Ashes Thread

Playing Devil's advocate to an extent, England have batted for sixty one overs, what do you think their score would be if they batted "normally"? For a start, Crawley always seems more vulnerable to me when he is pushing and poking at the ball - I'm fairly sure he wouldn't have reached forty eight if he had tried to "build an innings". The same applies to Duckett only less so, much is made of the fact he leave so few balls (something I think is asking for trouble as an opener), but is he better off fully committing to shots as opposed to having the question "do I play this or not?" turning over in his mind in the split second before the ball reaches him? I think I'm right in saying Pope's figures are better under McCullum than they were before (Bairstow's definitely are), but I'm still not convinced about him yet, while Root should just be told to play in the way that has got him to be rated right up there among England's best batsmen.

My guess is that, if that England line up had played those sixty one overs in typical test match mode, they would have ended the day at something like 180-3 - in this instance, I'd say ninety mote runs for one more wicket lost is the better position to be in. Baz ball isn't all bad or all good, but I agree that machismo took over last night, Pope's shot was ridiculous, Duckett was a bit unlucky, Root took leave of his senses and I think you just have to accept Brook for what he is - he's seems another one who wouldn't be as effective pushing and prodding to me.

Theres a balance though. England were playing positively and scoring runs quickly.

They were well on top of the Australian attack. Australia then decide to bowl short and set a trap and Englands batsmen fell for it and gifted them wickets. The hook is a big risk and there was no need to do it. Leave the short one and milk easy runs. They would soon change the plan. Play the situation.

It was really disappointing. England are close to losing the Ashes already and theyve gifted them.

How many stumpings have been dismissals as well.,

Play positively by all means. But this isnt that dismal Pakistan attack its the Worlds no.1 attack and taking on their short balls has been a ridiculous decision.

[John Buchanan]

Re: Official Ashes Thread

A couple of very basic questions:
1. Why does it matter if the ball pitches outside the line? If the ball is going to hit the wickets, it is going to hit the wickets.
2. Why have "umpires call"? If the ball is going to hit the wickets, it is going to hit the wickets.

[chrisp_1927]

Re: Official Ashes Thread

A couple of very basic questions:
1. Why does it matter if the ball pitches outside the line? If the ball is going to hit the wickets, it is going to hit the wickets.
2. Why have "umpires call"? If the ball is going to hit the wickets, it is going to hit the wickets.

I think the umpires call was instituted to reflect that the technology itself is going to have a margin of error. Although I do wonder if they could tighten up the margins a little bit. Maybe 1/3 of a stump instead of half kinda thing

[MacAdder]

Re: Official Ashes Thread

A couple of very basic questions:
1. Why does it matter if the ball pitches outside the line? If the ball is going to hit the wickets, it is going to hit the wickets.
2. Why have "umpires call"? If the ball is going to hit the wickets, it is going to hit the wickets.

I wondered this too.

The LBW law has always been a bit flowery and the ball pitching outside off stump used to be not out but in recent years it hasn't seemed to matter.

One just now looked an identical situation and had it been reviewed it would have been given out.

This is becoming as farcical as VAR is in football.

[The Bloop]

Re: Official Ashes Thread

Pitching outside the line only comes into play if the batter isn't playing a shot. It's hitting the pad outside the line I don't understand. Why is it relevant?

[John Buchanan]

Re: Official Ashes Thread

Pitching outside the line only comes into play if the batter isn't playing a shot. It's hitting the pad outside the line I don't understand. Why is it relevant?

Are you asking that question of the message board or the cricket board?

[Hilts]

Re: Official Ashes Thread

A couple of very basic questions:
1. Why does it matter if the ball pitches outside the line? If the ball is going to hit the wickets, it is going to hit the wickets.
2. Why have "umpires call"? If the ball is going to hit the wickets, it is going to hit the wickets.

1 its the LBW law. Has to pitch in line as well. However outside off stump if a batsman offers no shot you can still be given out LBW.

[John Buchanan]

Re: Official Ashes Thread

1 its the LBW law. Has to pitch in line as well. However outside off stump if a batsman offers no shot you can still be given out LBW.

Yes but why is it the law. If it's hitting the wickets........

[Hilts]

Re: Official Ashes Thread

Yes but why is it the law. If it's hitting the wickets........

Im not 100% but I think its to discourage negative bowling outside the line of the stumps. Thats definitely the case with outside leg stump as you cant be out even if not playing a shot.

The bowler knows to get and go for LBW they have to pitch it in line as well.

[tpcnw]

Re: Official Ashes Thread

A couple of very basic questions:
1. Why does it matter if the ball pitches outside the line? If the ball is going to hit the wickets, it is going to hit the wickets.
2. Why have "umpires call"? If the ball is going to hit the wickets, it is going to hit the wickets.

For 2 I think it is because there is sufficient doubt in the accuracy of the predicted trajectory. The prediction needs to show more that 50% of the ball hitting the stumps.

[The Bloop]

Re: Official Ashes Thread

For 2 I think it is because there is sufficient doubt in the accuracy of the predicted trajectory. The prediction needs to show more that 50% of the ball hitting the stumps.

It also allows a team to keep a review if an appeal to a not-out shows less than half the ball hitting the stumps.

[Hot Shot Hamish.]

Re: Official Ashes Thread

Pitching outside the line only comes into play if the batter isn't playing a shot. It's hitting the pad outside the line I don't understand. Why is it relevant?

A ball can pitch outside off stump and be given out.it’s the point of impact with the pad or body which is important. If the point of impact is outside off stump, then it’s not out, unless the batsman isn’t playing a shot, whereas if in the umpires mind it’s hitting the stump then it should be given out. If the ball pitches outside off stump but the point of impact is in front of the stumps then the umpire has a decision to make.

If the ball pitches outside leg stump the point of impact doesn’t matter. Pitching outside leg stump should always be not out.

[John Buchanan]

Re: Official Ashes Thread

A ball can pitch outside off stump and be given out.it’s the point of impact with the pad or body which is important. If the point of impact is outside off stump, then it’s not out, unless the batsman isn’t playing a shot, whereas if in the umpires mind it’s hitting the stump then it should be given out. If the ball pitches outside off stump but the point of impact is in front of the stumps then the umpire has a decision to make.

If the ball pitches outside leg stump the point of impact doesn’t matter. Pitching outside leg stump should always be not out.

I may be out of my depth here but, what about the spin bowlers who, if they can really spin the ball, would presumably invariably pitch it outside the line and then using warneian witchcraft, spin it back in. Warnes famous dismissal of Gatting springs to mind. What if that had hit the pad? Are am I talking nonsense?

[Hilts]

Re: Official Ashes Thread

I may be out of my depth here but, what about the spin bowlers who, if they can really spin the ball, would presumably invariably pitch it outside the line and then using warneian witchcraft, spin it back in. Warnes famous dismissal of Gatting springs to mind. What if that had hit the pad? Are am I talking nonsense?

Gatting would have been not out. That ball pitched outside leg.

[John Buchanan]

Re: Official Ashes Thread

Gatting would have been not out. That ball pitched outside leg.

Then the rule is farcical. Best ball of the century and not out.

Should be called the anti bowler with any skill rule, seamer or spinner.