Certified Legendary Thread 2nd Ashes Test England v Australia June 28-July 2 1930hrs @ Lords

[sherb]

Emburey did precisely the same thing to Srikkanth in 1981.

Kris Srikkanth: Jonny Bairstow dismissal, Like John Emburey, Alex Carey was within the rules | Cricket News - Times of India

Cricket News: The controversial dismissal of Jonny Bairstow in the second Ashes Test between Australia and England took former India opener Kris Srikkanth back 41 y

timesofindia.indiatimes.com

 

[sherb]

Emburey did precisely the same thing to Srikkanth in 1981.

Kris Srikkanth: Jonny Bairstow dismissal, Like John Emburey, Alex Carey was within the rules | Cricket News - Times of India

Cricket News: The controversial dismissal of Jonny Bairstow in the second Ashes Test between Australia and England took former India opener Kris Srikkanth back 41 y

timesofindia.indiatimes.com

Incidentally, one of the players in that match is someone who has been sanctimoniously lecturing us over the Bairstow incident - one Geoffrey Boycott.

 

[Mostyn]

I would say the Carey one was less in the spirit of cricket than the Bairstow one, there has been more outrage over the Carey one which says something

Carey took the ball and immediately threw down the stumps. Obviously still in the field of play.

The other one was deceptive. A player not continuing naturally with the play but pausing and trying to trick the opposition player.

 

[Whiskers]

It was still more like a conventional stumping than the Carey stumping which wasn't like a conventional stumping at all.

It was more like a run out except that Bairstow wasn't attempting a run so I guess that ruled out that mode of dismissal.



Yeah probably but it wasn't as outrageous as the Carey stumping, If Carey stumped Bairstow that way I doubt the uproar would have been so big.

I know what you’re saying because you’re not used to seeing a stumping from distance.
Carey acted immediately, Bairstow waited and waited until the batsmen finally moved. Bit cheeky by Bairstow, but that’s it.

 

[frankrizzo]

Incidentally, one of the players in that match is someone who has been sanctimoniously lecturing us over the Bairstow incident - one Geoffrey Boycott.

Boycotts known dopey johnny and his family since he was little kid and as is way in english cricket connections are more important than conduct or ability, bairstow knows the right people in english cricket so gets longer leash than most cant imagine foakes getting this level of support if he did something this stupid.

 

[Purple Suit]

I know what you’re saying because you’re not used to seeing a stumping from distance.
Carey acted immediately, Bairstow waited and waited until the batsmen finally moved. Bit cheeky by Bairstow, but that’s it.

That’s what makes it even better, one step ahead of the play. Spirit of the game is bull crap, Bairstow was dumb and every Pom before and after would have done the same thing if given the opportunity. Bunch of sore losers.

 

[luthor]

Despite all the logical arguments supporting the actions of Carey being totally legitimate AND despite Bairstow attempting (but failing to execute) the same type of stumping in the same match AND despite Travis Head confirming that Bairstow would have done the same to him given the opportunity AND despite the demonstrable hypocrisy from Broad and other sanctimonious gits like Boycott AND despite many historical examples of the English NOT adhering to the "spirit" of the game, all they can come up with is this whingy, whining catch all "Carey and the Aussies broke the spirit of the game" nonsense.

Instead of all this confected outrage and self-righteous posturing, they would be better off addressing the obvious shortcomings in both the substance and style in which they are playing.

If not for Stokes almost pulling another rabbit out of the hat, they would have been totally embarrassed in the Second Test.

Wake up to yourselves England

 

[ABAB]

I would say the Carey one was less in the spirit of cricket than the Bairstow one, there has been more outrage over the Carey one which says something

Carey threw the ball in less than a second when Bairstow was still in his crease so isn't remotely deliberate as what Bairstow did, there has been more outrage from one side of English supporters whereas the other side are saying they see nothing wrong with the stumping, now that's saying something about your so-called "more outrage".

 

[jhong]

How convenient for the English cricket scene , just as a report into allegations of racism among other things emerges from the English county scene, this blows up and it disappears into reports on Australians being cheats . I am shocked i tells ya !!

 

[Grogg]

How convenient for the English cricket scene , just as a report into allegations of racism among other things emerges from the English county scene, this blows up and it disappears into reports on Australians being cheats . I am shocked i tells ya !!

Nailed it.

 

[The Tilt]

Incidentally, one of the players in that match is someone who has been sanctimoniously lecturing us over the Bairstow incident - one Geoffrey Boycott.

I guess Boycott is still mulling over the apology he owes the Indian team.

 

[Sea eagle]

Would be funny if we were well on top if one of the tail just start walking way out of the crease after every ball force englands hand either ignore what we are doing or throw down stumps and take wicket.

I guess Boycott is still mulling over the apology he owes the Indian team.

Piers Morgan should be charged with elder abuse. For the sake of ratings he has allowed Boycott to act like a circus monkey and make a complete fool of himself and use it to get views. Boycott is being used due to his age and lack of awareness.

 

[Pistol Night]

Peter Lalor taking no shit from this English dickhead. Well played

 

[cats_09]

Peter Lalor taking no s**t from this English dickhead. Well played

I noticed Piers didn't show a spilt screen of the Bairstow dismissal - did he "mark" his crease before or after Carey had let go of the ball?

 

[Purple Suit]

I noticed Piers didn't show a spilt screen of the Bairstow dismissal - did he "mark" his crease before or after Carey had let go of the ball?

Surely it was afterwards, Carey didn't wait for him to mark his crease.

Piers also recons sandpaper gate was 3 years ago, it was 2018 and has nothing to do with the incident. 2005 Ashes, the poms admitted to using mints to get shin on the ball = cheating too.

 

[Whiskers]

Surely it was afterwards, Carey didn't wait for him to mark his crease.

Piers also recons sandpaper gate was 3 years ago, it was 2018 and has nothing to do with the incident. 2005 Ashes, the poms admitted to using mints to get shin on the ball = cheating too.

Yeah Trescothick talks about being the designated ball tamperer in his autobiography.
When they cheat they just write about it and have a laugh. It’s crazy.

 

[Andrew Mc]

Peter Lalor taking no s**t from this English dickhead. Well played

Slightly disappointed anyone gave the campaigner the time of day.

 

[Smoooothy]

Peter Lalor taking no s**t from this English dickhead. Well played

i like how piers threw to a break the minute it looked like his argument was about to become a spectacular failure

well done peter lalor, came out of that looking pretty damn good

 

[Nuggetz]

I usually don't like Lalor but he handled himself well on that nutters show. Well done.

Lets not forget Stokes had to play a freak innings for england to get close to Aus. He was also lucky in his innings with a few mishits falling safe & dropped catch. It was a herculean batting performance from him which was overshadowed due to himself, his coach, his teammates, English fans having a cry about the bairstow dismissal.

 

[beatnik]

Harmy and Jarrod Kimber defend the dismissal on Following On but the other commentator and all the listener messages were hostile…

Menners and Paul also gave an English apologist a massive platform on Cricket Unfiltered podcast to push the ridiculous English narrative

Menners bom fed back with an epic rant that eviscerates English cricket and ‘destroyed everything that they love’!

Language warning - this beautiful cricket polemic pulls no punches…

Get ‘em Menners

 

[WheelAndDeal]

i like how piers threw to a break the minute it looked like his argument was about to become a spectacular failure

well done peter lalor, came out of that looking pretty damn good

Piers Morgan is an absolute clown

Raises issues of his own while the guest respectfully listens and then continually cuts off his guest when they're trying to speak.

Would love nothing more than to see him in front of Brett Lee again one day...

 

[Trojan90]

Mitch Marsh in line to play if Green can't get up from soreness.

 

[Andrew Mc]

Would love nothing more than to see him in front of Brett Lee again one day...

And to think people chastised Lee for bowling short and quickly at him.

 

[Gough]

As long as it's all about Piers, that's all that matters.

 

[Joffaboy]

Dead Ball.
20.1.2 The ball shall be considered to be dead when it is clear to the bowler’s end umpire that the fielding side and both batters at the wicket have ceased to regard it as in play.

Which part of the above do the English players/media/supporters not understand...?

Cricket Rules – Law 39 – Stumped

1. Out Stumped

(a) The striker is out Stumped, except as in 3 below, if(i) a ball which is not a No ball is delivered and (ii) he is out of his ground, other than as in 3(a) below and (iii) he has not attempted a runwhen (iv) his wicket is fairly put down by the wicket-keeper without the intervention of another fielder. Note, however Laws 2.8(c) (Transgression of the Laws by a batsman who has a runner) and 40.3 (Position of wicket-keeper).(b) The striker is out Stumped if all the conditions of (a) above are satisfied, even though a decision of Run out would be justified.

2. Ball rebounding from wicket-keeper’s person

(a) If the wicket is put down by the ball, it shall be regarded as having been put down by the wicket-keeper if the ball(i) rebounds on to the stumps from any part of the wicket-keeper’s person or equipment other than a protective helmetor (ii) has been kicked or thrown on to the stumps by the wicket-keeper.(b) If the ball touches a protective helmet worn by the wicket-keeper, the ball is still in play but the striker shall not be out Stumped. He will, however, be liable to be Run out in these circumstances if there is subsequent contact between the ball and any fielder. Note, however, 3 below.

3. Not out Stumped

(a) Notwithstanding 1 above, the striker will not be out Stumped if he has left his ground to avoid injury, when his wicket is put down.(b) If the striker is not out Stumped he may, except in the circumstances of Law 38.2(e), be out Run out if the conditions of Law 38 (Run out) apply.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Bairstow was out stumped. Law 39 clearly states not out only in 39.3 (a) if he left his ground to avoid injury which Bairstow did not do.

Where is this 'not gaining advantage' BS come from in this clearly stated law? Or is it just more crap laws that England make up on the fly to suit their purile excuses and incessant bleating, carping, moaning, and whinging?