5th Ashes Test England v Australia July 27-31 1930hrs @ The Oval

[Topkent]

A Pom no surprise you've disappear when the heats on, if only Stokes hands were as soft as you

 

[A Pom]

I'm sure everyone on here is being consistent with their views and insisting that Stokes catch should've been out, just like they were with the Starc one...

 

[frankrizzo]

146 to win so thats at least two more new balls to get through need smith and head to do bulk of the work.

 

[MarcMaverick]

Good fightback in the 1st, need to keep going post-lunch. A tick over 2RPO needed from here.

 

[SC_Power]

I assume doesn't know the rules? Or maybe just confident on the LBW shout...

Initially I actually thought thats what they were checking?

 

[The Passenger]

I think the ball might have had too much lacquer on it.

 

[ABAB]

That's touch and go, and we would be spitting venom if that had gone against an Australian fielder.
He did control the ball and arguably himself, but not the release (which is not the Law). Its quite different to the Starc one, where it was grassed while trying to regain control of his own motion.

I guess smacking yourself in the leg when attempting to throw the ball in celebration is not full control of your own movement, so "not out" is probably correct. Either way one set of fans would be fuming at a grey area interpretation of the Laws.

Starc was more a legal catch then Stokes........

 

[BlueBayou]

That's touch and go, and we would be spitting venom if that had gone against an Australian fielder.
He did control the ball and arguably himself, but not the release (which is not the Law). Its quite different to the Starc one, where it was grassed while trying to regain control of his own motion.

I guess smacking yourself in the leg when attempting to throw the ball in celebration is not full control of your own movement, so "not out" is probably correct. Either way one set of fans would be fuming at a grey area interpretation of the Laws.

I'm not sure when the rule was changed, but the definition of a catch used to be 'in control of the further disposal of the ball'. Under that definition it is clearly not out. (I know the old rule is not relevent, this is just for comparison)

the clear guilt on Stoke's face when he realised he dropped the ball was the givaway. Then he has the barefaced temerity to review, after critisising Cummins at Lord's. Not sure I'd like to win that waay....or with a huge 'new ball' advantage.

Then questioning losing a review.....it's simple Ben, dont drop the catch, no review needed...

 

[Alesana]

Ah the saliva is meant to leave your mouth not dribble down your chin

 

[dumb]

All those laughing at the Poms aren’t realising the irony in their own double standards as well.

Nope, because I was OK with the Starc catch being not out

 

[Shadow89]

I literally switched it back on after being away for half an hour, for that ball. Greatest moment of the Ashes, and stumbled on it right when it happened.

Incred. It's almost like I willed it into existence.

 

[Malifice]

Cricinfo have deducted the review

plus who’s to say the ump didn’t give it not out due to thinking it hit the pad

this is absolute dissent by him now

1) Claim a catch you clearly knew you dropped by way of review.

2) Dissent with the umpires when you lose the review because you dropped it.

3) 'Spirit of Cricket.'

 

[Maddo11]

Lol

 

[Balls In]

When is the third new ball due?

 

[Sarcoidevo]

Am here at the Oval ... that Smith non catch was awesome .... the crowd whooping it up when the replay showed the ball hitting Smiths gloves and then us giving them hell when it was clear he didn't control it .... flipping brilliant

Couple of guys in front of us calling bullshit with us laughing in their face bringing up the Starc non catch

2hrs of rain is due just after the start of the 2nd session and then clear after 5pm

 

[Bareth Garry]

Stokes looking like a schoolboy caught in the act when the ball left his hands made that decision in my view. I wonder if he ran off celebrating like when they throw the ball upwards if the same decision is made. My first reaction was that it was not out because it hit the pad and that was why they left it to the last second to review.

 

[Shadow89]

Ah the saliva is meant to leave your mouth not dribble down your chin

View attachment 1761415

Suits the big baby

 

[Soggy2112]

And this is where every Australian on here will say “that should be out”? Just like Starc. Right?

Are they two correct decisions, or two incorrect ones?

Honestly it’s probably too soon to make a rational call about whether I think this should be out or not.

I still can’t decide whether I think Starc’s is out or not.

However the similarities are obvious, and at least the decisions are consistent with each other.

 

[ABAB]

I'm sure everyone on here is being consistent with their views and insisting that Stokes catch should've been out, just like they were with the Starc one...

Starc was more a legal catch then Stokes, we know cricket and you don't

 

[SC_Power]

Nope, because I was OK with the Starc catch being not out

There’s not many Aussies that thought that like the two of us.

 

[Jimthegreat]

So far 10 pages of "hahahaha's"......hahaha!

 

[11kgm]

England are hypocrisy is the best kind

 

[Maddo11]

I'm sure everyone on here is being consistent with their views and insisting that Stokes catch should've been out, just like they were with the Starc one...

Even stokes doesn't think he caught it

 

[BlueBayou]

Same law applied both times.

yep, but once correctly, and once incorrectly.....

 

[The King!]

If they get a wicket quick, the crowd will lift