Ashes 2023
-
@broughie said in Ashes 2023:
@Rapido out of the game for a long time so obviously no aware of "what constitutes a catch" but the guy had control, the ball was not in his finger tips and slipping out of his hands, you could see white knuckles suggesting a firm grip so he just used his the ball as balance hitting the ground. Maybe the rules are stupid because as Ponting suggested how quickly is a ball tossed in the air after other catches. Should there be a catch and release time?
What i find interesting is that I'm wondering if there is an 'interpretation gap' between Australia and the rest of the world on what constitutes the completion of a catch.
In the Ponting in the video you linked, and I'd already read about McGrath's opinion in a controversy-stoking article which summed up his opinion from his radio work. This morning I watched a clip with Gideon Haigh (who is my favourite cricket journalist) describe that as being 99 out of 100 cricket fans think that is a catch. I don't think iI'm just the 1.
Therefore I put forward the theory that the AFL interpretation of a completed mark has maybe seeped into Australian sporting expectations of a completed cricket catch.
NZ rugby has had these 'interpretation gaps' with other parts of the world (e.g. Britain usually) in our history. E.g. 'over vigorous' rucking back in the day. Tackle heights from the 1990s after NRL and local Pacific Islander influences changed some of the expected norms we were viewing.
-
@broughie said in Ashes 2023:
@Rapido out of the game for a long time so obviously no aware of "what constitutes a catch" but the guy had control, the ball was not in his finger tips and slipping out of his hands, you could see white knuckles suggesting a firm grip so he just used his the ball as balance hitting the ground. Maybe the rules are stupid because as Ponting suggested how quickly is a ball tossed in the air after other catches. Should there be a catch and release time?
On the actual technique / laws.
For me that is so clearly not out.
How far Starc had to dive meant that his dive was too outstretched to be able to do the 'tuck and roll' technique to protect the ball. Fair enough. But - Starc caught with a technique that prevented his elbows bumping the ground in his dive (which is the biggest risk to spilling an otherwise taken diving catch). The 'compromise' to not allowing your elbows to bump was to scrape the ball along the turf. So, not out.
I don't think any law needs to change. As it would impinge on the boundary line catch, which is one of the more spectacular parts of the sport.
It is funny Ponting making a reference to celebrating too quickly. e.g. Herchelle Gibbs in a very famous match Ponting was playing in ....
-
@Rapido Erasmus interpretation made the most sense to me.
“The law is specific in it says that the fielder has to have control of his body and movement. And that particular case, he was still moving and he put the ball on the ground. Now if you take that example and say you were sliding towards the boundary, if you slid into the boundary, we would’ve deemed it either four or six, depending if the ball touched the ground before. So there’s no difference in our interpretation for the catch,”
-
@MajorRage said in Ashes 2023:
@Rapido Erasmus interpretation made the most sense to me.
“The law is specific in it says that the fielder has to have control of his body and movement. And that particular case, he was still moving and he put the ball on the ground. Now if you take that example and say you were sliding towards the boundary, if you slid into the boundary, we would’ve deemed it either four or six, depending if the ball touched the ground before. So there’s no difference in our interpretation for the catch,”
Yip, see Boult's 'catch' in the 2019 wc final.
-
@Rapido said in Ashes 2023:
@MajorRage said in Ashes 2023:
@Rapido Erasmus interpretation made the most sense to me.
“The law is specific in it says that the fielder has to have control of his body and movement. And that particular case, he was still moving and he put the ball on the ground. Now if you take that example and say you were sliding towards the boundary, if you slid into the boundary, we would’ve deemed it either four or six, depending if the ball touched the ground before. So there’s no difference in our interpretation for the catch,”
Yip, see Boult's 'catch' in the 2019 wc final.
The what?
-
Late to the party but I'm of the opinion that the Bairstow stumping is just part of the game and he should be embarrassed by it. As a keeper I used to always try to catch batsmen out with stumpings whether it was to the slow bowlers or pace. A great opportunity was always if a batsmen was batting out of his crease and left the ball, I'd often have a go at stumping him before he could get back. To just wander out of your crease after leaving the ball is idiotic, he won't do it again lol.
-
@Virgil said in Ashes 2023:
2019 will never be forgotten
Nah. Aussies are the worst.
England usually my second cricket team - them and Sri Lanka. Aussies on the bottom of the pile
In the rugby England has been my second team since I was a kid. Aussies were always second bottom, only time I would cheer for them was against the Boks. But now I will cheer for the Aussies against Ireland too
-
@No-Quarter said in Ashes 2023:
Late to the party but I'm of the opinion that the Bairstow stumping is just part of the game and he should be embarrassed by it. As a keeper I used to always try to catch batsmen out with stumpings whether it was to the slow bowlers or pace. A great opportunity was always if a batsmen was batting out of his crease and left the ball, I'd often have a go at stumping him before he could get back. To just wander out of your crease after leaving the ball is idiotic, he won't do it again lol.
See, I was also a keeper, and I also did exactly this with any batsman that batted outside his crease. But I come back to the mankad thing where the key difference is a batsman seeking an advantage of sorts. Batting outside your crease attempts to alter the bowlers length, get on the attack etc. as does backing up illegally.
But batting in your crease, leaving a ball to the keeper, then dawdling out to tap the pitch with no intent to take a run, but doing so before checking that the keeper had tossed the ball to 2nd slip already, just seems a bit different to me. And honestly, I don’t think I’d have attempted a stumping in that situation.
But as long standing Ferners will attest to, I do have impeccable morals and ethical standards so perhaps I’m simply unusual here 🤷🏻♂️
-
i dont actually mind the *English cricket team, they are just too cocky at the moment and they only have themselves to blame for being down 0-2
Feel sorry enough for them ill support them in Football/Soccer...cant stand them in Rugby though.
*but yeah still fuck em after 2019.
-
@MajorRage said in Ashes 2023:
Please find me quotes where anybody has said England would have won without it?
@MajorRage said in Ashes 2023:
Yes, the coach and captain have had a few words about it (although neither said they would win if it hadn't happened)
Stokes has been widely reported saying "I would not want to win a game in that manner" not take a wicket. The inference is clear even though I don't believe Stokes thinks it cost the game. It is certainly suggestive (and hypocritical) enough to incense the rabid element amongst England's fans.
I don't as a rule read Twitter except for links posted here. In fact, I don't do social media.
@MajorRage said in Ashes 2023:
The reaction of almost half of the ex players that Bairstow is in the wrong and they have nothing to whinge about? Hussain, Morgan & Atherton who pretty much so lead the commentary team for a start? Or do you just read the pick n choose quotes from the usual England bashers on this thread?
I should have said the over-reaction is as if they would have won. Which I still believe. Completely over the top by fans and media (and fading politicians). Plus if half have said there's nothing to whinge about it still means a lot have come out in attack mode.
Still it keeps the pot simmering nicely until Thursday
-
-
-
@KiwiPie said in Ashes 2023:
I keep seeing that Bairstow's dismissal spurred Stokes to start bashing sixes. It wasn't the manner of the dismissal that caused that, it was a mountain of runs required and Stuart Broad at the other end with 3 batsmen worse than him to follow.
Broad must be the worst batsman who’s ever scored a test hundred. He looks clueless and woeful at times.
-
-
-
@dogmeat Wow. That is seriously reaching.
@barbarian That isn’t even close to the same. You can’t seriously believe that.
Proves my point about Twitter trawling though. No doubt I could do the same to find Carey / Cummins being unsporting arses then proudly post like it proves something.
-
@barbarian Apart from being out stumped I don't think there is much comparison at all. Bairstow as keeper is standing up and Patel still has his bat in the air (and his foot) but is inside the crease when the stumping is made.
Bairstow the batsman ducks a low bouncer, the ball bounces before it reaches Carey. Bairstow has time to scrape his mark inside the crease and wander two - three steps down the wicket before the bails come off.
One is more fluid and in the moment than the other. TBF to Carey he does release the ball before Bairstow leaves his crease.
I think you're being abit defensive bringing this up to support the act.
It doesn't need supporting. It's within the laws of the game. It's a bit of shithousery but so what.? If it happened at Eden Park for sure I'd give the Aussie's heaps, but as has been repeatedly pointed out in the pantheon of dirty acts by Ausie keepers it doesn't even count.
-
Gideon Haigh in the Oz
Because let’s be frank: it was not a day since every other English supporter had found themselves arguing for the letter of the law in the instance of Starc’s catch-that-wasn’t. Rightly so. This is a Test match. Laws apply with greater force in a skirmish between nations about a border and a dispute between neighbours over a fence.
The booing, as is most booing, was mainly harmless, carrying on as it did long past the point anyone could remember what they were booing, and becoming chiefly about companionship.
The parrot cry of ‘same old Aussies, always cheating’ also invites the question of from whom they might have learned it. After all, you can trace the line of Ashes tit-for-tat back to the Oval in 1882 when, coincidentally, WG Grace ran out the Australian Sammy Jones for wandering out of his crease under a misapprehension the ball was dead. “I taught the lad a lesson,” Grace is reputed to have said afterwards; just so.
But the jostling of players in the members? Really? By virtue of the antiquity of the Long Room, and the assumption that people-like-us know how to behave, Lord’s retains the privilege of unusual proximity to the players [dash] the frisson from hearing a player’s spikes on the hardwood floor is one of cricket’s glories.
They will not have it long, however, if blimps and prigs want to vent fury on their visitors because they are unaware of the laws that … checks notes …. their own club sets for the world. And what could be a worse look in the week of the Equity in Cricket report than puce-faced, dim-bulb snobs picking fights with a placid, softly-spoken Muslim player? Chaps, pull yourselves together. -
@MajorRage said in Ashes 2023:
@barbarian That isn’t even close to the same. You can’t seriously believe that.
The central issue is exactly the same. The batsman believes the ball is dead, so moves his foot. And given the time elapsed he may be fair enough in assuming the ball to be dead.
However that's not what the law is. Clearly the fielding team has decided the ball isn't dead, so it's incumbent on the batsman to stay in his crease until they do.
Both fair play, both out. Stay in your crease until the ball is dead.
