Go Back   Cricket Web > Cricket Discussion > Cricket Chat



Finding Seams on Apples - Order Your Copy!


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 23-12-2012, 04:45 PM   #721 (permalink)
U19 Captain
 
Tricia McMillan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Short Leg
Posts: 619
Quote:
Originally Posted by _Ed_ View Post
Haha. Know that feeling.
I had less of an excuse. I should be up at 9 on a Sunday morning (which is when it started in my time zone).

Sleeping through a 5 a.m. start time is more understandable. Next one is at 5:30 a.m. on Wednesday morning for me, I don't imagine I'll catch any of it.
__________________
85.5
Boult to Mathews, OUT, Caught at second slip! It was a length ball going across Angelo, who tried to hit it hard towards the leg side and got an outside edge that flew fast towards Guptill, who took a reflex catch in front of his face
Tricia McMillan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23-12-2012, 04:47 PM   #722 (permalink)
International Debutant
 
BeeGee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 2,746
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tricia McMillan View Post
We played well when I slept through the match?

Fair enough.
NZ did not play well.
Guptill played outstandingly well. The rest were average to crap.
BeeGee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23-12-2012, 04:49 PM   #723 (permalink)
International Debutant
 
BeeGee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 2,746
Quote:
Originally Posted by hendrix View Post
Guptill was out LBW twice
No. Wrong. Incorrect.
BeeGee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23-12-2012, 05:04 PM   #724 (permalink)
State Vice-Captain
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 1,296
Quote:
Originally Posted by BeeGee View Post
No. Wrong. Incorrect.
He was plumb in Peterson's first over and there was a sweep shot he played against Phangiso around over 10 or 11 which was even more plumb.

Just not a convincing win at all.
hendrix is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23-12-2012, 05:13 PM   #725 (permalink)
State Vice-Captain
 
Meridio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: London, West New Zealand
Posts: 1,038
Quote:
Originally Posted by hendrix View Post
He was plumb in Peterson's first over and there was a sweep shot he played against Phangiso around over 10 or 11 which was even more plumb.

Just not a convincing win at all.
Na, the sweep was going down leg, Hawkeye confirmed it. The one in the first over should've been out though, yeah.
Meridio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23-12-2012, 05:15 PM   #726 (permalink)
State Vice-Captain
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 1,296
Quote:
Originally Posted by Meridio View Post
Na, the sweep was going down leg, Hawkeye confirmed it. The one in the first over should've been out though, yeah.
Nope I'm not talking about the one they showed on hawkeye. This was one a couple of overs before that shout.

edit: just found it on cricinfo:
10.6 Phangiso to Guptill, no run, tossed up on leg stump, it was full and Guptill gets hit on the pads as he attempts a sweep. That was very close but the umpire doesn't show interest in that appeal. very close.

this is the one you're talking about:
13.5
Phangiso to Guptill, no run, tossed up and Guptill misses his sweep, get hit on the back pad. It was very close again.

Last edited by hendrix; 23-12-2012 at 05:16 PM.
hendrix is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23-12-2012, 05:18 PM   #727 (permalink)
State Vice-Captain
 
Meridio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: London, West New Zealand
Posts: 1,038
Quote:
Originally Posted by hendrix View Post
Nope I'm not talking about the one they showed on hawkeye. This was one a couple of overs before that shout.

edit: just found it on cricinfo:
10.6 Phangiso to Guptill, no run, tossed up on leg stump, it was full and Guptill gets hit on the pads as he attempts a sweep. That was very close but the umpire doesn't show interest in that appeal. very close.

this is the one you're talking about:
13.5
Phangiso to Guptill, no run, tossed up and Guptill misses his sweep, get hit on the back pad. It was very close again.
Ah, can't remember that one, therefore I will assume it didn't happen
Meridio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23-12-2012, 05:26 PM   #728 (permalink)
State Vice-Captain
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 1,296
Still a good innings, but I just can't bask in a win because we really played no better than we did in the first game.

Our strategy and planning was just awful again.
hendrix is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23-12-2012, 05:43 PM   #729 (permalink)
Hall of Fame Member
 
Smudge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Wellywood
Posts: 16,552
Haha, so now the coach and captain can't shake each other's hand after a win without earning the wrath of angry, sad little CWers. Great stuff.
__________________
Smudge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23-12-2012, 05:47 PM   #730 (permalink)
International Debutant
 
BeeGee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 2,746
Quote:
Originally Posted by Smudge View Post
sad little CWers.
Takes one to know one.
BeeGee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23-12-2012, 05:52 PM   #731 (permalink)
Dan
Global Moderator
 
Dan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 3,101
Quote:
Originally Posted by Howsie View Post
Wouldn't that be in regards to a spinner? Because I have no idea how an umpire is suppose to rule on what is and isn't a slower ball.
It isn't the ball in particular that matters, it is the bowler. The 'slow bowler' primarily refers to spinners, however the interpretation is generally along the lines of any bowler to whom the wicketkeeper would normally stand up to the stumps.

As soon as a bowler breaches that interpretation, they are to be considered a fast bowler for the remainder of the innings, regardless of the specific pace of any individual ball.
Dan is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 23-12-2012, 06:11 PM   #732 (permalink)
Cricket Web Staff Member / Global Moderator
 
Neil Pickup's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Oxford, England
Posts: 26,361
Quote:
Originally Posted by rvd619323 View Post
It isn't the ball in particular that matters, it is the bowler. The 'slow bowler' primarily refers to spinners, however the interpretation is generally along the lines of any bowler to whom the wicketkeeper would normally stand up to the stumps.

As soon as a bowler breaches that interpretation, they are to be considered a fast bowler for the remainder of the innings, regardless of the specific pace of any individual ball.
Really? Source? The only time I've seen that definition in terms of what makes a fast bowler is within the ECB's fast bowling directives in terms of length of spell permitted for U19 and younger... a definition that is hugely open to, er, manipulation if you have a good wicketkeeper.

I got entrusted with writing rules for a local festival last summer:

In addition to the Laws of Cricket, the umpire shall call and signal “no ball”, regardless of the pace of the bowler, if:
(a) Any high full pitched ball passes (or would pass) above waist height of a striker standing upright in his crease
(b) Any delivery bounces more than once or rolls along the ground

It's the way forward...
__________________
MSN Messenger: minardineil2000 at hotmail dot com | AAAS Chairman
CricketWeb Black | CricketWeb XI Captain
ClarkeWatch: We're Watching Rikki - Are You?

Up The Grecians - Exeter City FC

Completing the Square: My Cricket Web Blog
Neil Pickup is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23-12-2012, 06:11 PM   #733 (permalink)
Cricket Web Staff Member / Global Moderator
 
Neil Pickup's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Oxford, England
Posts: 26,361
Quote:
Originally Posted by rvd619323 View Post
It isn't the ball in particular that matters, it is the bowler. The 'slow bowler' primarily refers to spinners, however the interpretation is generally along the lines of any bowler to whom the wicketkeeper would normally stand up to the stumps.

As soon as a bowler breaches that interpretation, they are to be considered a fast bowler for the remainder of the innings, regardless of the specific pace of any individual ball.
Really? Source? The only time I've seen that definition in terms of what makes a fast bowler is within the ECB's fast bowling directives in terms of length of spell permitted for U19 and younger... a definition that is hugely open to, er, manipulation if you have a good wicketkeeper.

I got entrusted with writing rules for a local festival last summer:

In addition to the Laws of Cricket, the umpire shall call and signal “no ball”, regardless of the pace of the bowler, if:
(a) Any high full pitched ball passes (or would pass) above waist height of a striker standing upright in his crease
(b) Any delivery bounces more than once or rolls along the ground

It's the way forward...
Neil Pickup is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23-12-2012, 07:31 PM   #734 (permalink)
Dan
Global Moderator
 
Dan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 3,101
Quote:
Originally Posted by Neil Pickup View Post
Really? Source? The only time I've seen that definition in terms of what makes a fast bowler is within the ECB's fast bowling directives in terms of length of spell permitted for U19 and younger... a definition that is hugely open to, er, manipulation if you have a good wicketkeeper.
That's the same definition as the Cricket Australia fast-bowling rules. To be honest, it seems more like a common-sense interpretation than anything codified in the laws.

And I may have manipulated it somewhat a few years back by wicketkeeping up to the stumps to all bar our opening bowlers.

I agree with your version of the law anyway, just make it waist-high regardless of pace.
Dan is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 23-12-2012, 08:59 PM   #735 (permalink)
School Boy/Girl Captain
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Bristol, UK
Posts: 147
Quote:
Originally Posted by BeeGee View Post
Worst part of the win. Can't stand seeing that gremlin with a smile on his face.
Great win but this. Hesson is such a little gimpoid.
Neil Young is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Group A - South Africa, Mexico, Uruguay, France James 2010 Football World Cup - South Africa 322 24-06-2010 05:48 AM
India v South Africa Tests James Fantasy Cricket 0 02-02-2010 05:22 PM
South Africa v England Twenty20s James Fantasy Cricket 0 01-11-2009 07:50 PM


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:24 AM.


Powered by: vBulletin Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SEO by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2
Copyright ©2001 - 2011, Cricket Web