The Cricket Thread

[Savage Henry]

As in they were the biggest dissenters? I'm pretty sure they wouldn't go back now though would they? Kohli loves a good review.

Right.

I’m not quite sure what the Indian issue was, but it took them the longest time to accept it. It’s the reason why snickometer isn’t used any more. That was the happy medium reached.

[Jimi Shandrix]

15 minutes ago, Savage Henry said:

 

Right.

I’m not quite sure what the Indian issue was, but it took them the longest time to accept it. It’s the reason why snickometer isn’t used any more. That was the happy medium reached.

 

I seem to remember that their reservations were a mixture of finance and the fact that it was only 98% accurate. Think they were just grasping at anything to avoid changes. Maybe Doncaster was on the board. Glad they came round in the end. It took them a long time to get the hang of it though. Have seen more laughable reviews from India than any other team. 

[Fuctifano]

3 hours ago, Jimi Shandrix said:

It's baffling now to think that there was so much resistance to the review system at the start. Aussies would have won the test and the series had they been able to review what was a shocking decision. Fairly obvious now that it's been fantastic for the game and something that Scottish fitba could learn from. Change isn't always a bad thing. 

While I agree in general that DRS works better than review system in just about any sport (maybe tennis is better as it's black & white whereas people will still argue about umpire's call), there were no guarantees Australia would have had a review left by that stage.

Plus (something I'd forgotten until the watchback this morning) was that Kasper was plumb lbw but not given with about 55 still needed which (again presuming England hadn't spunked their reviews) would have made for a much less dramatic finish

Edited May 10, 2020 by Fuctifano

[Fuctifano]

2 hours ago, Savage Henry said:

 

Right.

I’m not quite sure what the Indian issue was, but it took them the longest time to accept it. It’s the reason why snickometer isn’t used any more. That was the happy medium reached.

 

Snicko is used? Do you mean hotspot?

[Savage Henry]

Snicko is used? Do you mean hotspot?

Indeed.

[Savage Henry]

I seem to remember that their reservations were a mixture of finance and the fact that it was only 98% accurate. Think they were just grasping at anything to avoid changes. Maybe Doncaster was on the board. Glad they came round in the end. It took them a long time to get the hang of it though. Have seen more laughable reviews from India than any other team. 

And yet they were the first to rail against international umpire standards.

[Jimi Shandrix]

1 hour ago, Fuctifano said:

While I agree in general that DRS works better than review system in just about any sport (maybe tennis is better as it's black & white whereas people will still argue about umpire's call), there were no guarantees Australia would have had a review left by that stage.

Plus (something I'd forgotten until the watchback this morning) was that Kasper was plumb lbw but not given with about 55 still needed which (again presuming England hadn't spunked their reviews) would have made for a much less dramatic finish

Very true. I too had conveniently forgotten about Kasper surviving another horrible call. In general, leaving aside DRS, the standard of umpiring has improved dramatically in recent years. 

[die hard doonhamer]

I noticed that BBC Sport are doing a feature on the "best performances you have seen live" on their football page today. It got me thinking about live cricket I've been to and made me realise how lucky I've been in witnessing some amazing moments. I've watched Joe Root and Steve Smith score double hundreds, watched Andrew Flintoff bowl one of his career defining spells (to Kallis at Edgbaston, 2008. It's probably second only to his spell to Ponting in 2005 at the same venue), and I was there the first time that Kevin Pietersen played the switch hit in an ODI (v New Zealand at Chester-le-street, again in 2008 - bowler Scott Styris).

What's the best performance others have seen in the flesh?

[Fuctifano]

I saw Chris Martin score a run. 

[Benjamin_Nevis]

On 10/05/2020 at 20:57, Savage Henry said:

And yet they were the first to rail against international umpire standards.

 

I vaguely, and I mean very vaguely remember a stooshie about this. Was this in any way related to the series in Pakistan which almost seemed to be Mike Gatting versus Shakoor Rana? I wasn't into cricket at the time but it was all over the news. I started watching tests on the BBC in the early 90s - I actually think the first one was a drawn series against Pakistan - there were still home umpires then. 

[Savage Henry]

3 hours ago, Day of the Lords said:

I vaguely, and I mean very vaguely remember a stooshie about this. Was this in any way related to the series in Pakistan which almost seemed to be Mike Gatting versus Shakoor Rana? I wasn't into cricket at the time but it was all over the news. I started watching tests on the BBC in the early 90s - I actually think the first one was a drawn series against Pakistan - there were still home umpires then. 

We must be of vaguely similar ages.  I only recall after the fact news reports of that series, but I was definitely aware of cricket at the time.  

I think this may have been the origins of it, but it certainly continued long after that.  I also think that as the BCCI has grown more influential, the issue has become exaggerated.  Really, it was only one country that was opposed to the changes (and it’s fair to say the changes have largely been successful) but they were able to amplify the issue beyond reason.  

I’d actually like to know why it was just India that was so opposed.

[Fuctifano]

India were also the most opposed to T20 cricket until they won the first World Cup in 2007

Edited May 22, 2020 by Fuctifano

[Benjamin_Nevis]

12 hours ago, Savage Henry said:

We must be of vaguely similar ages.  I only recall after the fact news reports of that series, but I was definitely aware of cricket at the time.  

I think this may have been the origins of it, but it certainly continued long after that.  I also think that as the BCCI has grown more influential, the issue has become exaggerated.  Really, it was only one country that was opposed to the changes (and it’s fair to say the changes have largely been successful) but they were able to amplify the issue beyond reason.  

I’d actually like to know why it was just India that was so opposed.

i just remember the footage of Gatting absolutely losing his shit at Rana. He actually got a huge amount of stick back here for that, yet Rana's behaviour was ridiculous. They fell out over a 12th man fielder swap, Rana then gave a few batsmen out on some fairly poor LBW decisions. Home umpires definitely continued for some time - Dickie Bird was doing England tests well into the 1990s. 

I first took an interest in cricket as a student in 1992. I was bored as f**k and started watching it on the Beeb because there was nothing else on. Waqar Younis and Wasim were top bowlers at that time and they were great to watch, even though I had virtually no idea what was going on. The following summer I watched pretty much all of the Ashes series in which Shane Warne arrived in glorious fashion. 

[die hard doonhamer]

England v West Indies has been confirmed as happening in July, with the first test at the Ageas Bowl from the 8th July, then the second and third tests both taking place at Old Trafford, starting on the 16th and 24th. For each game the teams will stay in the on-site hotels and be completely isolated. The West Indies will arrive on the 9th June and will isolate at Old Trafford, using it as their training base.

Hopefully all goes well between now and then, and we'll finally have some live cricket to watch again. Will be interesting to see how Old Trafford holds up hosting back to back tests, preparing two test match wickets is a big ask for the ground staff.

[jaggyness]

England v West Indies has been confirmed as happening in July, with the first test at the Ageas Bowl from the 8th July, then the second and third tests both taking place at Old Trafford, starting on the 16th and 24th. For each game the teams will stay in the on-site hotels and be completely isolated. The West Indies will arrive on the 9th June and will isolate at Old Trafford, using it as their training base.
Hopefully all goes well between now and then, and we'll finally have some live cricket to watch again. Will be interesting to see how Old Trafford holds up hosting back to back tests, preparing two test match wickets is a big ask for the ground staff.

Someone who is more knowledgeable than I, or can be bothered looking it up, when Pakistan had to play their matches in UAE, did they have as short turn around periods for tests on the same ground?

[die hard doonhamer]

4 minutes ago, jaggyness said:

5 hours ago, die hard doonhamer said:

England v West Indies has been confirmed as happening in July, with the first test at the Ageas Bowl from the 8th July, then the second and third tests both taking place at Old Trafford, starting on the 16th and 24th. For each game the teams will stay in the on-site hotels and be completely isolated. The West Indies will arrive on the 9th June and will isolate at Old Trafford, using it as their training base.
Hopefully all goes well between now and then, and we'll finally have some live cricket to watch again. Will be interesting to see how Old Trafford holds up hosting back to back tests, preparing two test match wickets is a big ask for the ground staff.

Someone who is more knowledgeable than I, or can be bothered looking it up, when Pakistan had to play their matches in UAE, did they have as short turn around periods for tests on the same ground?

These appear to be the closest at the same ground in that period. They had a couple of extra days, but similar challenges.

[jaggyness]

Good to see Rory Burns back in after his return from injury. If that squad is all fit then going to be a few people who miss out, probably unfairly. Assuming Burns comes in looking at
Burns, Crawley/Sibley, Denly, Root, Stokes, Pope, Foakes/Buttler, Wood, Archer, Broad/Curran, Anderson. Know that means no specialist spinner but with Denly and Root both bowling a bit of spin there is options there.

[die hard doonhamer]

The 11 should be

Burns
Sibley
Crawley
Root
Stokes
Pope
Foakes
Ali
Archer
Broad
Anderson

IMO

[Arthur Orton]

3 minutes ago, die hard doonhamer said:

The 11 should be

Burns
Sibley
Crawley
Root
Stokes
Pope
Foakes
Ali
Archer
Broad
Anderson

IMO

Can't argue with that tbh.

[jaggyness]

The 11 should be
Burns
Sibley
Crawley
Root
Stokes
Pope
Foakes
Ali
Archer
Broad
Anderson
IMO

I like Wood and I would always have him in the team if fit, probably at Broad's expense. Problem is he's so rarely fit. Crawley has a slightly worse avg than Denly but long term I agree he's a much better option at 3.