Apparently the western part of the country works a normal 11-7 to accommodate this.
Cricket things that annoy you
- Thread starter Gethelred
- Start date
- Tagged users None
Joel ****ing Wilson
Fox ray
- Jul 31, 2010
- 8,924
- 12,357
- AFL Club
- Sydney
- Other Teams
- S'roos, New Jets, Cronulla
- Moderator
- #2,307
The western part does have an unofficial local time, to compensate for the fact that the Sun refuses to comply with the CCP's wishes.
- Apr 19, 2008
- 19,385
- 30,702
- AFL Club
- Essendon
- Other Teams
- Stars, Mets, USC, Southport Sharks
sabso
bring your vodka and your charlie
- Aug 6, 2024
- 1,324
- 2,233
- AFL Club
- Richmond
- Other Teams
- Eng cricket, Leics CCC, Leicester Tigers
This spelling of his name
The King!
Chosen One
Numbers and names on whites
- May 5, 2016
- 47,478
- 53,217
- AFL Club
- Geelong
One small part of the traditionalist in me agrees but the rest doesn’t: well the names anyway.
Numbers yes I think they’re pointless, but what’s wrong with the names?
If Brad Haddin starts one more sentence with “the one thing you know about”…..
The King!
Chosen One
I honestly have no logical reason, just feels tacky. I realise it probably makes it easier for fans, but I never felt like cricketers were moving around so much you couldn’t tell who was who.
- May 5, 2016
- 47,478
- 53,217
- AFL Club
- Geelong
Fair point. I think the big thing is that for a long time during the 70s and 80s when a lot of people (not sure of your age) and even 90s, you had the Aussies playing who generally everyone would know, and touring sides where MOST fans were fairly familiar with the faces they saw because there were less teams, so they were touring more often, and they didn’t have 3 separate squads for 3 different formats: they’d arrive, play the World Series cup, play their test matches, then be back a few years later with 50-80 per cent similar players so you’d be familiar with a lot of them and know who they were.
Now nobody knows one player from the next when they get here. I follow cricket as close as most and beyond Babar, Rizwan, Abbas - and I didn’t even realise he was back in the team - and 1-2 others - I would be f**ked trying to recognise anyone in the Pakistan team that played the other night
31550
Premiership Player
- Feb 5, 2022
- 3,791
- 6,155
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
I can remember when the scoreboard operators used to put a dot or a dash next to the fielders name on the scoreboard so you could tell who it was when you were at the ground.
The current version of Daddles the Duck.
The original had so much more character.
The original had so much more character.
CakeEater
Brownlow Medallist
User name to post checks out
You must be a big fan of this board then. Some real carpet cricket warriors on here.
DRS.
So much annoys me about DRS I hardly know where to begin. For a start, the system was implemented to eradicate the "howler". All very good, but we rarely see that. In the case of Jaiswal's not out being overturned, terrific. Cummins KNEW it was out and called for the review immediately. No discussion necessary.
However, I detest these 15 second committee meetings trying to decide whether the umpire MAY have got it wrong. I'd give them 5 seconds to decide, not 15. Then we see the ridiculous situation where a team has 3 reviews, they get it wrong but retain the review. WTF? They got it wrong, why should they retain it?
IMHO, Ball tracking is nothing more than an educated guess. It should be scrapped and only used for edges, stumpings, run outs, etc. Make the umpires get it right. Ball tracking is not proof, I've seen way too many times where the ball behaved like the magic bullet. We've all seen them. The ball is pitching in line, hits the batsman on the back foot playing from the crease, then mysteriously takes off and missing leg stump by a margin or bouncing over the top? WTF?
I feel too many umpires use it as a security blanket, waiting for players to do their job for them. Ridiculous calls for run outs when the batsman has passed the crease and almost past the stumps. Umpires should be making those calls themselves, otherwise why are they even out there?
And finally, 9 wickets down, a plumb LBW or clear catch to win the Test match, players jumping around celebrating, and the No.11 calls for the review and just annoys the crap out of everyone.
So much annoys me about DRS I hardly know where to begin. For a start, the system was implemented to eradicate the "howler". All very good, but we rarely see that. In the case of Jaiswal's not out being overturned, terrific. Cummins KNEW it was out and called for the review immediately. No discussion necessary.
However, I detest these 15 second committee meetings trying to decide whether the umpire MAY have got it wrong. I'd give them 5 seconds to decide, not 15. Then we see the ridiculous situation where a team has 3 reviews, they get it wrong but retain the review. WTF? They got it wrong, why should they retain it?
IMHO, Ball tracking is nothing more than an educated guess. It should be scrapped and only used for edges, stumpings, run outs, etc. Make the umpires get it right. Ball tracking is not proof, I've seen way too many times where the ball behaved like the magic bullet. We've all seen them. The ball is pitching in line, hits the batsman on the back foot playing from the crease, then mysteriously takes off and missing leg stump by a margin or bouncing over the top? WTF?
I feel too many umpires use it as a security blanket, waiting for players to do their job for them. Ridiculous calls for run outs when the batsman has passed the crease and almost past the stumps. Umpires should be making those calls themselves, otherwise why are they even out there?
And finally, 9 wickets down, a plumb LBW or clear catch to win the Test match, players jumping around celebrating, and the No.11 calls for the review and just annoys the crap out of everyone.
sabso
bring your vodka and your charlie
- Aug 6, 2024
- 1,324
- 2,233
- AFL Club
- Richmond
- Other Teams
- Eng cricket, Leics CCC, Leicester Tigers
That marais erasmus has been good to excellent per umpire stats does not shake my memory of him as a fat useless campaigner.
He was the third umpire for that bairstow stumping, and he initially said he was checking for a run out.
He was the third umpire for that bairstow stumping, and he initially said he was checking for a run out.
Found the names useful on Monday trying to identify some of the sub fielders through the binoculars.
Numbers are unnecessary though I agree.
It has improved the game.
When people complain that it "was supposed to get rid of the howler" guess what, it has.
Of course it brings with it it's own peculiarities , but overall the game is in a good place with it. Perfectionists will never be pleased.
Besides Root (66) I wouldn’t know a player around the world on number, not even a wild guess.
Maybe kids minds adapt to it? I remember a few from the ODI days in the 90’s as a kid, only the Aussies though. If that’s the case I don’t have a problem with it.
- Jan 13, 2015
- 1,667
- 1,022
- AFL Club
- Sydney
the numbers are probably more for the kids - merchandise etc and to align with white ball and keep the kids interested in keeping test cricket alive as well - it's all i've got.
i guess based on the below, there really isn't a need for numbers - all it is, is dressing up the players shirt.
the numbers can be irrelevant as there's been numerous examples of players changing:
gillespie went from 13 to 4
lehmann 25 to 10
clarke 49 to 23
symonds 39 to 63
the '99 world cup saw numbers first used in a world cup where the captains wore #1 and the shirt numbers were all 1-15 so warne wore 5 instead of 23, waugh wore 1 instead of 5 etc.
another notable change was gayle from 45 to 333.
i'm sure players wear different numbers in all these franchise 20/20 leagues at times.
the double digit numbers seem to be popular as well 33.marnus, 77 abbott, 88 zampa
some shield examples are head wears 34 for SA, and 63 for aust, carey wears 5 for SA and 4 for aust.
