Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Its not why would they do that.... the point is it would not surprise me if they did.....they the indian players have too much influence over what pitches they want to play on be that batting decks or raging bunsens .... its not right and goes against the spirit of the game IMOWhy would they do that?
Why would they serve up a wicket, that gives an opportunity to turn the final into a lottery, when they have not one, but three world class spinners in their squad, that can cause problems on relatively normal pitches, when their opposition has one?
How do people not get this after years of watching it happen in all countries?
Australia DONT get helped when they serve up absolute green tops because often it will negate the fact that they usually have bowlers who can get sideways movement out of even the most benign surfaces. What it does is often bring opposition bowlers into the equation, while bringing Australian batsmen back to the pack.
Likewise, when Indian pitches are diabolically challenging, it brings their own batsmen back to the field, while making visiting spinners more dangerous than they would otherwise be.
It serves no logical purpose for the hosts to do this and if they do, they’re idiots
We say "serve up a green top" as fans because we are frustrated at the blatant pitch doctoring in other countries, but Cricket Australia would never do that as it is unfair.I don’t recall saying that they are.
However I’ve read year after year of ******* fans saying ‘wait till they come here and we roll out a green top for them’ without stopping to realise what the likely implications of that are.
In addition, while i fully acknowledge there are loads of occasions where pitches in India have and do get made to order, there are also loads when they just simply produce pitches that spin in a country where - wait for it - pitches naturally spin.
Makes it all the more bizarre and galling that we are stuck with the 25fps cameras to accommodate third umpire reviews, while the 1000fps cameras are off getting slow mo montages of the crowd or some exotic bird outside the ground or other nonsenseIt's to do with the fact there's a distance the ball can travel in the last frame or between frames of the camera and it can also move slighty as it impacts the batsman, so there's a small amount of variance remaining in the system and the umpire's call region encompasses that variance plus more.
Depending on the "ball tracking software cameras" it's between ~100fps and ~300fps. Still, not "fast" enough, obviously.Makes it all the more bizarre and galling that we are stuck with the 25fps cameras to accommodate third umpire reviews, while the 1000fps cameras are off getting slow mo montages of the crowd or some exotic bird outside the ground or other nonsense
No they don’t.
On the question of which bowlers can bowl how many overs in the event of rain, it's not going to affect tonight but more a hypothetical...I don't think so.
On the question of which bowlers can bowl how many overs in the event of rain, it's not going to affect tonight but more a hypothetical...
Say Starc and Hazlewood had both bowled their 10 overs by the end of the 20th over. Then it rains and the match is reduced from 50 overs to 35. Do they then say "5 of your bowlers can bowl 7 overs", or do they say "2 of your bowlers have already bowled 10 overs, so your 3 remaining bowlers are only allowed to bowl 5 maximum"?
Point is that if the former is the case, it would have meant we only had to find 1 over from our "fifth" bowler, as our 3rd and 4th bowlers would have still been allowed 7 each.
And they were spot on in the end.The selectors will stick with Starc despite his poor economy rate and bowling average in the hope he'll come good in the big game/s.
NahIf he isn't captain he doesnt get picked in the side, probably selected more for PR then actual white ball ability.