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.
Reckon this one has Trescothick’s “saliva” still on itThey've been continually trying to get the balls replaced every few overs or so. It's been a tactic from them the whole series.
To be fair to the Poms, they didnt ask this time, the Umpires themselves look to have made the call after it cannoned into Uzzies helmet, but I reckon the English know something more about the 'old' balls in the box than we do.
He'd already properly caught the ball. He was in control of his movement and stopping naturally. The ball never left his firm grip and control.A sliding fielder is not in control of their own movement. If he couldn't properly catch the ball without face planting the grass then that's on him.
Got saliva?
He'd already properly caught the ball. He was in control of his movement and stopping naturally. The ball never left his firm grip and control.
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...
Smith needs to consider his partner when facing Wood. If he can see Head is struggling then why is he so keen to push a single? Need to bat in partnerships, be smart. Leaving Head out to dry isn't going to help Australia win the match.
Telling sign will be if they don't want the new ball at 80 oversBut that ball will be a 2023 ball. I am convinced that replacement was from around 2019 when they used different leather and more pronounced seam and it was way better for bowling.
I've read Hazlewood say that in a 2015 game against NZ he plucked a replacement ball out that he reckoned looked like a 2008 ball, and was much harder and he got a wicket with extra bounce. Those boxes can have balls from a large span of years.
At least Slats won't be thereI can see Ch7 and Fox being even worse with the Warner love in when he plays his last test.
Never heard the expression.Flat as a shirtcarters hat on the old one....
Speaking of Bairstowe...... spirit of cricket and all that... it's fair to sneak down the legside while the batsman is not able to look, to try to be in position to (drop yet another) catch?To be fair, Starc actually held his catch, and Stokes dropped his.
But happy for consistency. No worries if Bairstow wants to start looking for a stumping as well.
Someone sliding is not in control of their movement. If Starc had slid into the boundary there would have been no question that it was 6, this was no different.
Genuinely no idea why England would review that. Was clear as day.
We need to get the NFL BF crew on here, if anyone knows what is or isn't a catch.... It's themHe didn’t even have two feet on the ground yet.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk