3rd Ashes Test England v Australia July 6-10 1930hrs @ Headingley

[Around the Wicket]

got 2 wickets

Gifted one, how the hell does that class as a stumping lol

 

[Alfonz]

No they are not. They are incredibly dumb.

In the rules, the only definition of a finally settled ball is that it is whatever the umpire says is a finally settled ball. That's it. Purely subjective by the ump.

But the rules also state that whether or not the umpire perceives a dead ball also depends on him perceiving that both teams have indicated that they no longer consider the ball to be in play. So they in fact actually do decide between them what consitutes a dead ball prior to the umpire. And then whether the ump actually signals a dead ball is left optional.

That's why the idea of sporting conventions exist around this rule as written - because it's stupid. It requires three inter-subjective perceptions from three parties where each determines whether the ball is or isn't in play.

And it leads to this exact clusterf*ck of a situation.

Spare me. It is 100% certain that play is not dead when the wicket keeper immediately throws at the stumps with Bairstow still standing in his crease at the time the ball is released. Any number of things could happen apart from the stumping, such as an errant throw or ricochet from the stumps/bat/body that leads to the batsmen taking off for a run that could lead to runs being scored and/or a run out.

You are also completely missing the point that whether the stumping was the ethical thing to do or not, there is blatant hypocrisy from England and their imported sheep shaggers whinging about something they have repeatedly tried in the past (including in this very test match).

 

[Woody15]

No they are not. They are incredibly dumb.

In the rules, the only definition of a finally settled ball is that it is whatever the umpire says is a finally settled ball. That's it. Purely subjective by the ump.

But the rules also state that whether or not the umpire perceives a dead ball also depends on him perceiving that both teams have indicated that they no longer consider the ball to be in play. So they in fact actually do decide between them what consitutes a dead ball prior to the umpire. And then whether the ump actually signals a dead ball is left optional.

That's why the idea of sporting conventions exist around this rule as written - because it's stupid. It requires three inter-subjective perceptions from three parties where each determines whether the ball is or isn't in play.

And it leads to this exact clusterf*ck of a situation.

Incidents and confusion involving dead balls are incredibly rare as is this particular mode of dismissal. Id say the rules are therefore very clear and don't provide the drama and debate you seem to think happens so often.

 

[Around the Wicket]

If the batsmen is charging and gets caught out I believe its fair game but if your waiting for a player to walk out of crease after the ball is complete I don't like it.

 

[Woody15]

Well well well would you look at that.

Thats the thing a lot of the English press are complaining about. Bairstow never intended to run. Neither did Patel in this dismissal. Only difference here is the type of bowler.

And the praise for Bairstow and how smart he was and how stupid the batsman was. Exactly what is being said here. I wonder who the commentators are in this video. Anyone know?

 

[The Casey Cat]

Reversed the appeal though by Vettori.

Is not the only time he did. And the appeal was not reversed.

 

[The Casey Cat]

If the batsmen is charging and gets caught out I believe its fair game but if your waiting for a player to walk out of crease after the ball is complete I don't like it.

No 'waiting' happened. Was thrown immediately. Then Bairstow was dumb enough to leave his crease.

 

[damochandler]

Will Anderson keep playing

 

[Membling]

I think the amount of tests in such a short duration will test the English attack.

Will see how it plays out over next few but I think a major flaw in Bazball becomes evident in multiple tests

 

[Linda Lovelace]

Linda Lovelace any thoughts on the laws of the game?

The law is poorly written irrespective of which side of the coin ol' Fanta balls is on.

 

[Santana]

Nooooooo Bairstow nooooooooooo!

 

[Lingsface]

Will Anderson keep playing

Did he leave comedy?

 

[TubbsFarquhar]

Did he leave comedy?

One can hope.

 

[Wallaby]

The best thing about this is - there's no way the poms will drop Bairstow now - so he remains in the side and he remains a rubbish keeper.

 

[frankrizzo]

hazlewood needs a rest and looked well below his best for most of the test so i assume boland will come in, with such short turnaround for quicks be tempting to bump carey to 6 and bring in neser for green i doubt that would happen and i hope green comes right or this series could be a serious setback in his development he really looked like a rabbit in the headlights this whole test.

 

[Santana]

Wonder if they will give Hazlewood a rest or go for the kill shot



Khawaja
Warner
Labuschagne
Smith
Head
Green
Carey
Cummins
Starc
Boland
Murphy

 

[damochandler]

Did he leave comedy?

Can only hope. He can take Dave Hughes with him

 

[frankrizzo]

Wonder if they will give Hazlewood a rest or go for the kill shot

He doesnt look 100 percent to me and his had to spend half test bowling bumpers not great for a bloke who keeps getting side strains, we have to rotate at least one quick cant be cummins starc is fresher and bowled better he is odd man out for next test.

 

[MatthewB]

Will Anderson keep playing

he looked like he didn't want to be there, wouldn't be surprised if he retires after this series.

 

[Neese]

I'll just leave this here. I await A Pom's mental gymnastics.

https://www.news.com.au/sport/cricket/englands-hypocrisy-laid-bare-after-cheating-claims-during-second-test/news-story/406ad362e13f5865bbaddc754e179837

I blocked that troll. Not interested in the bs and am much less stupid now I don't have to read it

 

[Santana]

He doesnt look 100 percent to me and his had to spend half test bowling bumpers not great for a bloke who keeps getting side strains, we have to rotate at least one quick cant be cummins starc is fresher and bowled better he is odd man out for next test.

Yep, hopefully Boland can handle them targeting him better than in the 1st test

 

[Linda Lovelace]

Spare me. It is 100% certain that play is not dead when the wicket keeper immediately throws at the stumps with Bairstow still standing in his crease at the time the ball is released. Any number of things could happen apart from the stumping, such as an errant throw or ricochet from the stumps/bat/body that leads to the batsmen taking off for a run that could lead to runs being scored and/or a run out.

You are also completely missing the point that whether the stumping was the ethical thing to do or not, there is blatant hypocrisy from England and their imported sheep shaggers whinging about something they have repeatedly tried in the past (including in this very test match).

It is not 100% certain. The rule says nothing about a wicket keeper 'immediately' throwing at the stumps. What is immediate? Objectively, how much time does Carey have before immediate becomes non-immediate?

 

[Gough]

Yep, hopefully Boland can handle them targeting him better than in the 1st test

It's a strong squad, you can make a decent case for picking any of the back up bowlers.

 

[Sir_Loin]

Will Anderson keep playing

Hasn’t picked up a bat in years

 

[frankrizzo]

Yep, hopefully Boland can handle them targeting him better than in the 1st test

We dont know much about pitch either, they went totally flat first then greenish second so we have no idea what they want now.