Jump to content

Cricket


Recommended Posts


  • 3 months later...
8 hours ago, The Cockney Don said:

First Test to the Aussies, close one though.

Bairstow's wicketkeeping cap's got to be on a shoogly peg, why did they not take the new ball asap and even half of the runs back from no balls would have made it interesting. I think england let this slip to be honest.

Link to comment
19 minutes ago, johnstrac said:

Bairstow's wicketkeeping cap's got to be on a shoogly peg, why did they not take the new ball asap and even half of the runs back from no balls would have made it interesting. I think england let this slip to be honest.

@Bluto10is the expert on all things wicket keeping.  What's your opinion champ?

Link to comment
2 hours ago, johnstrac said:

Bairstow's wicketkeeping cap's got to be on a shoogly peg, why did they not take the new ball asap and even half of the runs back from no balls would have made it interesting. I think england let this slip to be honest.

Think it was because the old ball was still swinging and with limited runs to play with, didn't want to risk the harder new ball as it travels faster/further when hit.

I agree with you though that with only 2 wickets required at that point, the benefits of taking the new ball probably outweighed the risks of it. 

No matter what, it was still the best Test match I have ever had the pleasure of watching. Always good to see the guffies take a beating although I have to concede that Stokes' captaincy was the main reason for it being such a great match. Probably regrets his decision now to declare with 40 minutes to play on the first evening....Root was flying and if he'd declared at stumps they'd likely have been 50 runs or so better off and probably would have won.

 

Link to comment
3 hours ago, Ten Caat said:

Think it was because the old ball was still swinging and with limited runs to play with, didn't want to risk the harder new ball as it travels faster/further when hit.

I agree with you though that with only 2 wickets required at that point, the benefits of taking the new ball probably outweighed the risks of it. 

No matter what, it was still the best Test match I have ever had the pleasure of watching. Always good to see the guffies take a beating although I have to concede that Stokes' captaincy was the main reason for it being such a great match. Probably regrets his decision now to declare with 40 minutes to play on the first evening....Root was flying and if he'd declared at stumps they'd likely have been 50 runs or so better off and probably would have won.

 

Agreed re the swing but they were guilty of bowling short with the old, softer ball allowing a fair few runs to be totalled up.

Link to comment
3 hours ago, RAZOR said:

Scotland beat the West Indies today. First time ever.

🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿

Some result that even though the Windies aren't what they once were, still a decent enough side.

Link to comment
17 hours ago, RAZOR said:

Scotland beat the West Indies today. First time ever.

🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿

To make the World Cup, need to win the last two games against Zimbabwe(tuesday) & Netherlands, and hope Sri Lanka beat Zimbabwe today.

 

Link to comment

What has just happened in the 2nd Ashes Test is going to be talked about for years. I love seeing the guffs get beaten at anything but the Bairstow dismissal leaves a bad taste in the mouth. Australia should have withdrawn their appeal but the catch that (correctly) wasn't given last night seems to have overtaken any thoughts of fair play going forward

Link to comment
7 minutes ago, Ten Caat said:

What has just happened in the 2nd Ashes Test is going to be talked about for years. I love seeing the guffs get beaten at anything but the Bairstow dismissal leaves a bad taste in the mouth. Australia should have withdrawn their appeal but the catch that (correctly) wasn't given last night seems to have overtaken any thoughts of fair play going forward

It's in the rules so while extremely unsporting it is perfectly legitimate.

I'm sure you will England trying to do the same to Australia in the next 3 tests.

I'm very surprised at the behaviour of the Lords members though as they should be much more aware of the rules.

Link to comment
28 minutes ago, Ten Caat said:

What has just happened in the 2nd Ashes Test is going to be talked about for years. I love seeing the guffs get beaten at anything but the Bairstow dismissal leaves a bad taste in the mouth. Australia should have withdrawn their appeal but the catch that (correctly) wasn't given last night seems to have overtaken any thoughts of fair play going forward

What about the Starc catch that was chalked off... sure you can use an interpretation of the rules to say not out, but that was a catch, which Starc was fully in control of, no question.  So Bairstow should have been out already.

These first two tests have been incredible... this is proper sport.  I can't stand the Empires XI and their supporters - worse than Huns IMO.  However, Ben Stokes is an absolute warrior - what a player!  Should be playing for the Kiwis tho...

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
2 hours ago, torry_battery_ram said:

It's in the rules so while extremely unsporting it is perfectly legitimate.

I'm sure you will England trying to do the same to Australia in the next 3 tests.

I'm very surprised at the behaviour of the Lords members though as they should be much more aware of the rules.

Why surprised? Self entitled arseholes.

Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...