The ashes 2023

[Sparrowhawk]

5 minutes ago, Chocolate Teapot said:

CDG was out of his crease and trying to set off for one

Having watched them all again I'll give you this one. Up to a point. He had half set off in case there was a run, then had abandoned that idea and just didn't get back.

 

Nobody was going for a run at all in any of the others.

[Finnegan]

5 minutes ago, Sparrowhawk said:

Having watched them all again I'll give you this one. Up to a point. He had half set off in case there was a run, then had abandoned that idea and just didn't get back.

 

Nobody was going for a run at all in any of the others.

 

I love the idea that the Zimbabwean who had giddily set off to do laps of the ground celebrating his maiden 50 was trying to steal another run whilst waving his bat in the air somewhere around Long On

 

Edited 3 July 2023 by Finnegan

[Guest Chocolate Teapot]

6 minutes ago, Finnegan said:

 

I love the idea that the Zimbabwean who had giddily set off to do laps of the ground celebrating his maiden 50 was trying to steal another run whilst waving his bat in the air somewhere around Long On

 

https://www.espncricinfo.com/story/brendon-mccullum-s-mcc-spirit-of-cricket-lecture-full-transcript-1023531

Edited 3 July 2023 by Chocolate Teapot

[RowlattsFox]

5 minutes ago, Finnegan said:

 

I love the idea that the Zimbabwean who had giddily set off to do laps of the ground celebrating his maiden 50 was trying to steal another run whilst waving his bat in the air somewhere around Long On

 

To be fair in that case the ball is clearly still in play until it returns to the keeper...and it was the non-striker who was run out. 

 

[Finnegan]

1 minute ago, RowlattsFox said:

To be fair in that case the ball is clearly still in play until it returns to the keeper...and it was the non-striker who was run out. 

 

 

So to be clear about this, I don't have a problem with any of these dismissals and I've had similar debates on here over mankading. If its in the rules, it's in the rules, in football we have a term "play to the whistle", this is just cricket's equivalent. I don't see an issue with it. 

 

What annoys me is the ridiculous snobbery and toffery from a small sub-section of English sports fans who get significant righteous indignation any time someone dares partake in one of their private school sports in a manner not becoming of a Head Boy. Especially when it comes (as with the likes of Stuart Broad) wrapped up with considerable hypocrisy. 

 

We get it a lot in rugby as well, where "Rugby Values™" is our "Spirit of Cricket™" and it's an equally silly and superficial load of rubbish that (as with cricket) masks a sport with a lot of deeply rooted, systemic bigotry that can be conveniently ignored as long as everyone's acting like a polite gentleman, shaking hands and being a good sport. 

 

This is an absolute superb piece of satire that I imagine an experienced cricket fan who, unlike me, understands all the nuances of the game can no doubt spot a fair few parallels with. 

[Sparrowhawk]

16 minutes ago, Chocolate Teapot said:

https://www.espncricinfo.com/story/brendon-mccullum-s-mcc-spirit-of-cricket-lecture-full-transcript-1023531

So if in ten years an Australian says they regret the Bairstow thing everyone will forgive and forget?

 

Thanks for that link though, his lecture's really nice.

 

This Colin Cowdrey anecdote is hilarious:

 

Legend has it that he looked at Jeff Thomson and said, "Mr Thomson I believe? How good to meet you." To which the Australian quick said, "That's not going to help you fatso, piss off."

[Guest Chocolate Teapot]

4 minutes ago, Sparrowhawk said:

So if in ten years an Australian says they regret the Bairstow thing everyone will forgive and forget?

 

Thanks for that link though, his lecture's really nice.

 

This Colin Cowdrey anecdote is hilarious:

 

Legend has it that he looked at Jeff Thomson and said, "Mr Thomson I believe? How good to meet you." To which the Australian quick said, "That's not going to help you fatso, piss off."

If cummins came out yesterday and said they were caught up in the heat of the moment it probably would have landed differently. Cummins has been acting up all test though, and probably wanted to get Bairstow back for carrying his mates off the pitch on day one.

Edited 3 July 2023 by Chocolate Teapot

[Finnegan]

3 minutes ago, Chocolate Teapot said:

If cummins came out yesterday and said they were caught up in the heat of the moment it probably would have landed differently. Cummins has been acting up all test though, and probably wanted to get Bairstow back for carrying his mates off the pitch on day one.

 

But McCullum does it multiple times throughout his career (and it's Vettori that called back Collingwood, not Baz) and only years later feels the need to apologise and only then because he's given the opportunity to speak about sportsmanship at some posh dinner. 

 

You're mad at Cummins for not immediately coming off the pitch high on emotion and calling out his own wicket keeper? 

 

Just seems a lot like applying different standards to me. 

[Guest Chocolate Teapot]

3 minutes ago, Finnegan said:

 

But McCullum does it multiple times throughout his career (and it's Vettori that called back Collingwood, not Baz) and only years later feels the need to apologise and only then because he's given the opportunity to speak about sportsmanship at some posh dinner. 

 

You're mad at Cummins for not immediately coming off the pitch high on emotion and calling out his own wicket keeper? 

 

Just seems a lot like applying different standards to me. 

I'm not mad at all tbh. 

[ealingfox]

If I were Bairstow I'd be more annoyed at why the umpire still hadn't called the over by the time the ball hit the stumps. The keeper had collected the ball and there was clearly no intention of a run, what was he waiting for?

 

Do we now have to wait an extra 5 seconds at the end of every over in case there's a chance of a stumping? Because now any time the over is called too quickly there's grounds for complaint, particularly if the batsman leaves or misses and is close to the crease.

Edited 3 July 2023 by ealingfox

[leicsmac]

6 minutes ago, ealingfox said:

If I were Bairstow I'd be more annoyed at why the umpire still hadn't called the over by the time the ball hit the stumps. The keeper had collected the ball and there was clearly no intention of a run, what was he waiting for?

 

Do we now have to wait an extra 5 seconds at the end of every over in case there's a chance of a stumping? Because now any time the over is called too quickly there's grounds for complaint, particularly if the batsman leaves or misses and is close to the crease.

And to add to this, over rates are ridiculously slow as it is.

[StanSP]

1 hour ago, Chocolate Teapot said:

Cummins has been acting up all test though

In what way, just out of interest? 

[Guest Chocolate Teapot]

32 minutes ago, StanSP said:

In what way, just out of interest? 

It was a joke related to just stop oil and his climate pursuits. Obviously not a very good one.

[st albans fox]

3 hours ago, Finnegan said:

 

Obviously the context is going to be a tiny bit different because it takes an especially dopey brain fart to casually wander out of your crease for literally no obvious reason. Finding any stumping at all similar to the Bairstow one is near impossible because very few elite cricketers in history have been THAT thick. 

 

Oh wait, no, Paul Collingwood was. Guess who the wicket keeper was? 

 

Oh and guess which wicket keeper stumped Murali when he was celebrating Sangakara's century? Or Mahwire celebrating his 50?

 

Or maybe the best of all of them, mostly because it's immortalised on the ECB's own website and features video footage of Broad himself pointing and celebrating it ( ) when De Grandhomme was stumped whilst wandering up to question an LBW shout with the umpire.

 

Fortunately none of this really matters because, in the immortal words of Stuart Broad, arbiter of cricket morality, in 2013 (after refusing to walk after edging behind) - "Those things aren't remembered. It's Winning the series that will be remembered. We do have a win-at-all-cost mentality. I think we're quite an unpleasant team to play against at the moment. Teams won't play against us and enjoy the experiences. That's what we want. "

 

And don't get salty with me for posting this btw, I mean, I'm allowed to be critical because it's my team too. It's the England and Wales cricket team eh right lads

 

Only the Colingwood incident is comparable 

 

and I still hark back to Bairstow marking himself in with his foot before he wandered out of his crease. 
 

I think the umpires should have pointed that out to Cummins and asked him if he wanted to withdraw the appeal on the basis that Bairstow

didn’t just wander out of his crease with abandon.  I felt they really didn’t want to get involved.  

[kenny]

2 hours ago, ealingfox said:

If I were Bairstow I'd be more annoyed at why the umpire still hadn't called the over by the time the ball hit the stumps. The keeper had collected the ball and there was clearly no intention of a run, what was he waiting for?

 

Do we now have to wait an extra 5 seconds at the end of every over in case there's a chance of a stumping? Because now any time the over is called too quickly there's grounds for complaint, particularly if the batsman leaves or misses and is close to the crease.

This has been my thought all along. The umpires have taken no flack, its telling they needed to go to a tv replay to check whether the ball was dead or not as they didn't know.

 

For me its an easy decision to state that as quick as Carey was, the ball was dead and there would be no arguments afterwards.

 

 

[Corky]

I see the PM has had his say. 

 

Hopefully someone will tell him to "stick to politics".

[Lionator]

All this debate is covering up the cracks that England have been mostly rubbish this series. Utterly reckless at times and if it wasn't for individual brilliance by Root and Stokes in the first two games, they'd have been hammered both times. We can still win this series 3-2 but it's going to take a lot of brave selection decisions which I don't think Stokes and McCullum will make as well as a lot more nuance with shot selection. Go hard against bad balls, but only hit it when it's there to be hit. 

[Spiritwalker]

What a shocking game the umpires had by the way. I don’t think I’ve ever seen so many decisions overturned.

[Brainy]

It's worse than a mankad for me in the sense that at least with a mankad you're stopping the batsman from stealing a run. What are you punishing Bairstow here, going to talk to Stokes? IMO you only do these sort of things when you're desperate, prime example I can think of is the Indian women last year. While the rules allow it you can't call it cheating but you certainly have to ask why you want to get someone out in that manner?

Edited 4 July 2023 by Stinkenzo

[Corky]

Do you reckon, if they hadn't done it with Bairstow, whether they would have done it to Stokes on 150?

[StanSP]

 

 

 

[StanSP]

4 minutes ago, Corky said:

Do you reckon, if they hadn't done it with Bairstow, whether they would have done it to Stokes on 150?

A million percent. They would do it to win, and there'd have been more use doing it to Stokes than Bairstow. 

[when_you're_smiling]

8 hours ago, ealingfox said:

If I were Bairstow I'd be more annoyed at why the umpire still hadn't called the over by the time the ball hit the stumps. The keeper had collected the ball and there was clearly no intention of a run, what was he waiting for?

 

Do we now have to wait an extra 5 seconds at the end of every over in case there's a chance of a stumping? Because now any time the over is called too quickly there's grounds for complaint, particularly if the batsman leaves or misses and is close to the crease.

The umpire wouldn’t call ‘over’ in the middle of Carey in action throwing at the stumps though.

 

Carey doesn’t wait around, he straight away throws the ball and if he’d missed, there’s the (small) potential England could have run an over throw. 

[Sparrowhawk]

27 minutes ago, when_you're_smiling said:

Carey doesn’t wait around, he straight away throws the ball and if he’d missed, there’s the (small) potential England could have run an over throw. 

Which of course they would have declined because the ball was dead. Right?

[UniFox21]

 

 

 

This seems a bit pathetic