cricket betting betway blog banner small
Page 5 of 95 FirstFirst ... 345671555 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 75 of 1411
Like Tree239Likes

Thread: ***Official*** 4th Test at the MCG

  1. #61
    TNT
    TNT is offline
    State Vice-Captain TNT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    australia
    Posts
    1,387
    Quote Originally Posted by Spikey View Post
    did you actually read that
    Nope, cut and pasted with a blindfold on.
    If you nick it walk

  2. #62
    International Captain Starfighter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Location
    Thinking of supersports
    Posts
    6,738
    Quote Originally Posted by TNT View Post
    Ducking under a ball does not make it a bouncer, it must pass over shoulder height if the batsman was standing upright in the crease. Maybe Atherton and yourself are getting a little confused.
    Except I am talking about deliveries of that height. If you watch, you will see.
    Quote Originally Posted by TNT View Post
    Nope, cut and pasted with a blindfold on.
    Yup.

  3. #63
    Global Moderator Spark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    A Blood Rainbow
    Posts
    48,651
    why are you doing this to yourselves
    do you think people will be allowed to make violins?
    who's going to make the violins?

    forever 63*

  4. #64
    International 12th Man Debris's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    sydney
    Posts
    1,602
    Quote Originally Posted by Starfighter View Post
    Atherton's right, Johnson is a moron as usual. There have been quite a number incidents that are clearly in breach of the law 41.6, the wording of which is pretty clear. Jake Ball receiving four in a row at Brisbane was quite disgusting, both the wicket delivery and the ball before should have been no-balled.

    You'd think in a world after the death of Phil Hughes people would be more concerned about the bowling of such deliveries to batsmen who are far worse at playing them that he was. But apparently that is subordinate to being all tough and macho.
    Or they have some perspective and realise that it was a freak accident and that most competitive sport contains some risk. The rule you are talking about certainly would not have helped him.
    Spark likes this.


  5. #65
    International Debutant Victor Ian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    here
    Posts
    2,317
    Quote Originally Posted by TNT View Post
    Dangerous bowling is fact based.


    41.6.1 Notwithstanding clause 41.6.2, the bowling of short pitched deliveries is dangerous if the bowler’s end umpire considers that, taking into consideration the skill of the striker, by their speed, length, height anddirection they are likely to inflict physical injury on him. The fact that the striker is wearing protective equipment shall be disregarded.
    41.6.3 tells the umpire how to know if the ball is a short pitched delivery so that the umpire can then consider, the skill of the striker to determine if it is likely to inflict physical harm. The second part is not fact based. It is subjective. The first part is fact based, I guess , to stop umpires from having to call no ball when the ball strikes the pads for an LBW.

  6. #66
    TNT
    TNT is offline
    State Vice-Captain TNT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    australia
    Posts
    1,387
    Quote Originally Posted by Victor Ian View Post
    41.6.3 tells the umpire how to know if the ball is a short pitched delivery so that the umpire can then consider, the skill of the striker to determine if it is likely to inflict physical harm. The second part is not fact based. It is subjective. The first part is fact based, I guess , to stop umpires from having to call no ball when the ball strikes the pads for an LBW.
    The umpire can only deem a ball that would have passed over the batsmans shoulder as dangerous, attacking the rib cage for instance cant be classed as dangerous. If you use both eyes and watch when Anderson was struck on the helmet by Cummins (its on utube) he actually ducked his head down into the delivery which if he was standing upright it would not have passed over his shoulder so if the umpire had of called it dangerous then the Australians would have every right to challenge the umpires call.

  7. #67
    Cricketer Of The Year TheJediBrah's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    9,462
    Quote Originally Posted by TNT View Post
    The umpire can only deem a ball that would have passed over the batsmans shoulder as dangerous, attacking the rib cage for instance cant be classed as dangerous. If you use both eyes and watch when Anderson was struck on the helmet by Cummins (its on utube) he actually ducked his head down into the delivery which if he was standing upright it would not have passed over his shoulder so if the umpire had of called it dangerous then the Australians would have every right to challenge the umpires call.
    not "of" , never "of"

    "had of", "would of", "could of" etc. are not English

    In this case you don't even need "have". Just leave it at "had".
    Last edited by TheJediBrah; 21-12-2017 at 03:07 AM.

  8. #68
    TNT
    TNT is offline
    State Vice-Captain TNT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    australia
    Posts
    1,387
    Quote Originally Posted by TheJediBrah View Post
    not "of" , never "of"

    "had of", "would of", "could of" etc. are not English

    In this case you don't even need "have". Just leave it at "had".
    Hint I'm not english either but if I was I would had of written it differently.

  9. #69
    International Captain Starfighter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Location
    Thinking of supersports
    Posts
    6,738
    Quote Originally Posted by Debris View Post
    Or they have some perspective and realise that it was a freak accident and that most competitive sport contains some risk. The rule you are talking about certainly would not have helped him.
    I didn't say the rule would have helped. It's the attitude I am taking exception to.

  10. #70
    International Debutant Victor Ian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    here
    Posts
    2,317
    Quote Originally Posted by TNT View Post
    The umpire can only deem a ball that would have passed over the batsmans shoulder as dangerous, attacking the rib cage for instance cant be classed as dangerous. If you use both eyes and watch when Anderson was struck on the helmet by Cummins (its on utube) he actually ducked his head down into the delivery which if he was standing upright it would not have passed over his shoulder so if the umpire had of called it dangerous then the Australians would have every right to challenge the umpires call.
    I was only pointing out that the whole rule is not fact based. I have no opinion on whether the bouncers were dangerous as I was only listening to the game and not watching it.

    Is there any footage of the 4 bouncers bowled to Ball? I'd like to watch that.

    The Anderson one is irrelevant simply because he is Anderson and deserves to be hit in the face (Just kidding. Like Cook I also secretly admire Anderson)

  11. #71
    Cricket Web: All-Time Legend flibbertyjibber's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Mrs Miggins pie shop
    Posts
    20,301
    Can't see anything but another defeat here, only way we will compete is if Anderson gets some conditions and uses them to destroy the Aussie first innings and even then we may still lose anyway.

  12. #72
    Cricketer Of The Year Gnske's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Henry Kissinger was a war criminal
    Posts
    9,264
    Quote Originally Posted by Spikey View Post
    it's essentially the equivalent of the bully hitting someone and saying "stop punching yourself", and he hasn't actually acknowledged the rule that Atherton has mentioned while at the same time acknowledging the very poor level of skill of some batsman (" yeah, some guys struggle to hold the bat"). Instead it's just lame jingoistic trolling (which I get is Johnson's thing now and unfortunately for the next 40 years, so perhaps I'm stupider for even acknowledging it) but there's actually an issue here. There's a rule there to protect **** batsman and it doesn't have as a footnote "but hey suck it up you **** **** get better or enjoy getting hit in the head". But the rule doesn't get enforced. The only time bowlers get called out for dangerous bowling is when they accidentally bowl a beamer which seems odd when we seeing Broad being repeatedly targeted essentially because he got hit and now he's a bit cooked. I mean, it didn't even get called out when Clarke was saying get ready for a broken ****ing arm. If Johnson had said something constructive like "well I think the rule is obsolete and should be removed from the laws of the game" I wouldn't be calling it stupid, but he's just straight up ignored the matter to do some stupid trolling. For my part, going back to 3 bouncers an over but being more protective towards tail order batsman would be a happy compromise
    lol spikey can't play the short ball, everyone laugh
    Quote Originally Posted by hendrix View Post
    When I was 14 a friend mentioned to me that using lube was a great way to enhance masturbation. Later that night I snuck into the bathroom, and grabbed a container of what I thought was moisturiser. It turned out to be tanning lotion, rendering both my hands and my gargantuan penis orange for the next week or so.

    This video reminds me of that experience.
    Quote Originally Posted by Flem274* View Post
    i like many come to cw to briefly escape the pain of mediocre and obscure existence by being mediocre and obscure on the internet.

  13. #73
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2017
    Location
    Taladega
    Posts
    9
    WOW looks like test cricket will soon be a game for pussies....you can always depend on an Englishmen for this. If you don't know how to play the short ball (tail-ender or not) and you play international cricket for your country, go and f****ing learn how to play it, especially if you know long before a series starts that the short ball is going to be used to great extent.
    Last edited by Ricky Bobby; 21-12-2017 at 04:36 AM.
    Gnske likes this.

  14. #74
    Global Moderator Spark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    A Blood Rainbow
    Posts
    48,651
    I kind of sympathise with where Atherton is coming from but it's completely impossible to implement in the way he likes whilst keeping cricket an actual competitive sport.

    Imagine the high farce that would erupt if we get another Anderson/Panesar situation with two tailenders hanging on for grim life in a critical Test, and the umpire goes up to Pat Cummins and says "sorry, but you aren't allowed to bowl bouncers, these guys aren't really good enough to play them". Or indeed if the #10 and #11 scrapes together a 30-40 odd partnership, looking comfortable against deliveries that are pitched up. The situation where we ask, as Howe routinely notes, sportsmen who are genuinely terrible at a discipline to go out and display that discipline in vital moments is a severe oddity and worth talking about, but so long as tailenders consistently provide match-turning contributions with the bat then they're as fair game as the top six IMO.
    Last edited by Spark; 21-12-2017 at 05:03 AM.

  15. #75
    Request Your Custom Title Now! Spikey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    the guy's trash bro
    Posts
    46,205
    I'm struggling to picture a scenario where that would actually happen. I think it's just as simple as when your 8/180 chasing 500 in the 4th innings with a day to play it might be good if we didn't have balls aimed at the heads of tailenders
    flibbertyjibber likes this.
    http://www.theguardian.com/sport/blo...cricket-legacy

    Brad McNamara ‏@bbuzzmc
    Will say this once and then nothing else. Defamation laws quite clear in Aus.be careful.

Page 5 of 95 FirstFirst ... 345671555 ... LastLast


Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. *Official* Fifth Test at the Oval
    By Furball in forum Ashes 2015
    Replies: 1455
    Last Post: 24-08-2015, 11:42 AM
  2. *Official* Fifth Test at the SCG
    By uvelocity in forum Ashes 2013/2014
    Replies: 2050
    Last Post: 13-01-2014, 12:12 AM
  3. *Official* Fourth Test at the MCG
    By morgieb in forum Ashes 2013/2014
    Replies: 2351
    Last Post: 31-12-2013, 02:37 AM
  4. *Official* First Test at Lord's
    By James in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 3701
    Last Post: 28-07-2011, 12:46 PM
  5. *Official* Fifth Test at the SCG
    By Craig in forum Ashes 2010-2011
    Replies: 3603
    Last Post: 15-01-2011, 01:07 PM

Posting Permissions

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