**Official** Semis and Final Thread

[Jono]

Gul? Why? Bowled brilliantly

[Turbinator]

Originally Posted by Agent Nationaux

Yep. Our bits and pieces players deserved to lose.

Hafeez
Malik
Afridi
Tanveer
Nazir
Kakmal
Gul

All of the above need to be kicked out.

May want to keep Malik against India though.

[Daemon]

Originally Posted by Agent Nationaux

Yep. Our bits and pieces players deserved to lose.

Hafeez
Malik
Afridi
Tanveer
Nazir
Kakmal
Gul

All of the above need to be kicked out.

Hafeez can make it to the side on bowling alone imo.

[Agent Nationaux]

Most of his career he has been a support bowler, and ever since he has been our main spearhead he has disappointed. Falls under pressure.

[benchmark00]

A good result for Australia, provided they can win tomorrow, given that they're more likely to post a competitive total against SL than Pak.

Either way I think the Lankans will win the whole thing.

[Agent Nationaux]

Now that we are out, hoping for the Windies to win the whole thing.

[Turbinator]

Yeah, want the WI to win it.

[stumpski]

Heh, just noticed that the women's semi-final earlier is between the same teams! Might be a first.

Probably best to keep CH Gayle and the womenfolk well apart in any case.

[Fusion]

Originally Posted by Agent Nationaux

Yep. Our bits and pieces players deserved to lose.

Hafeez
Malik
Afridi
Tanveer
Nazir
Kakmal
Gul

All of the above need to be kicked out.

Don't hate on Gul!

Seriously though, we need a fast bowler and he's better than the other choices we have. I have confidence in him to bowl at the death. He doesn't deliver as much as he used to, but he comes through often enough. Plus, he's shown that he can occasionally contribute with the bat as well.

[Burgey]

Originally Posted by benchmark00

A good result for Australia, provided they can win tomorrow, given that they're more likely to post a competitive total against SL than Pak.

Either way I think the Lankans will win the whole thing.

Shame you're not here for the Swans parade today at lunch time mate.

[Agent Nationaux]

Originally Posted by Fusion

Don't hate on Gul!

Seriously though, we need a fast bowler and he's better than the other choices we have. I have confidence in him to bowl at the death. He doesn't deliver as much as he used to, but he comes through often enough. Plus, he's shown that he can occasionally contribute with the bat as well.

We need to introduce new quicks and not rely on Gul who flakes out when we need him. He is mediocre at best, doesn't know how to use the new ball and despite having a good Yorker, continues to bowl short. Gul was never an intelligent bowler, and has actually regressed when most bowlers learn new tricks after playing international cricket for a while.

[benchmark00]

No Naved-ul-Hasan no Pakistan.

[chicane]

According to the rules the bails need to be completely dislodged, but I seem to remember many run-outs/stumpings given when the bail is even partially dislodged. Keeping that in mind I thought that run-out should have been given.

[Jono]

Would love the actual wording of the laws regarding the bails being dislodged.

I found it interesting Nasser saying that the bail has to be dislodged but also enough so you know it isn't coming back down into the groove.

Wtf? I understand his thinking, but considering we know the bails didn't go back into the groove, since it was a run out appeal, it's a weird way of looking at it.

[chicane]

Yeah that made no sense. In the freak chance that the bails lodge back on, the batsman's not out.

This is my reference for the rule:

1. Wicket put down
(a) The wicket is put down if a bail is completely removed from the top of the stumps, or a stump is struck out of the ground,

Law 28 (The wicket is down) - Laws - Laws of Cricket - Laws & Spirit - Lord's