England Cricket | Page 5 | Vital Football

England Cricket

mozzer59

Vital Squad Member
#81
Utter toilet batting performance from England today. Another doctored pitch, but England won the toss and will be batting in the best of the conditions and haven't done well enough. I'd also add that neutral umpires can't come back quick enough as these Indian umpires are clearl completely biased with fingers going up any time anything is close with no benefit of doubt for the batsman, which in no way excuses England's batting performances.
Finger happy umpires?? Every LBW replayed on channel 4 with the technology was correct!
 

SteveTreacle

Vital Squad Member
#82
Finger happy umpires?? Every LBW replayed on channel 4 with the technology was correct!
The Broad one (when he was batting)?

It's also not as simple as replaying it and seeing if hawkeye shows whether it would have hit or clipped the stumps. The on-field decision is key as if it's given out, whilst a team can review it, hawkeye only has to show a fraction of the ball clipping the top edge of the leg stump for the decision to be upheld; conversely, if not given, it need quite a fraction of the ball to hit for the not out decision to be overturned. As I say, the fact that the umpires were very trigger happy in the England innings was key - for example, Root got one which just looked doubtful - when he reviewed it, it was just clipping the edge of the leg stump bail. In their innings Broad seemed to have got their opener right in front of the stumps, it wasn't given, and when we reciewed it, despite looking like a routine LBW, the decision couldn't be overturned as not enough of the bail was being hit.

All of this conjecture does not excuse England's woeful batting though!
 

ThreeSixes

Vital 1st Team Regular
#83
I say, the fact that the umpires were very trigger happy in the England innings was key - for example, Root got one which just looked doubtful - when he reviewed it, it was just clipping the edge of the leg stump bail. In their innings Broad seemed to have got their opener right in front of the stumps, it wasn't given, and when we reciewed it, despite looking like a routine LBW, the decision couldn't be overturned as not enough of the bail was being hit.
So Root's one WAS out but didn't look out, and the Broad ball might just have clipped a bit of bail, but looked out. And that is proof that the umpires are biased!

That's clutching at straws mate - that's like Fergie's "I've seen them given" argument when he was saying an onside goal should have been disallowed.
 

SteveTreacle

Vital Squad Member
#84
So Root's one WAS out but didn't look out, and the Broad ball might just have clipped a bit of bail, but looked out. And that is proof that the umpires are biased!

That's clutching at straws mate - that's like Fergie's "I've seen them given" argument when he was saying an onside goal should have been disallowed.
So you didn't see the stumping at the end then, where Sharma's foot was in the air and the third umpire didn't even both looking at all replays possible? A repeat of what happened in the last test to the same player? Or in the last Test where a bat pad was taken with the ball hittign the bat on the follow through and popping up to Pope and, again, the umpires only replayed enough to see what they wanted and gave it not out. There has been a pattern of decisions against England in the last two tests and even the mild-mannered Root was going balistic at the end. And what's worse is that the Indian directors showed no replays of the stumping incident at the end and their biased commentators made no mention of it. England have been poor, but the umpiring and production of the series has been very fishy.
 

alphabet_king

Vital 1st Team Regular
#95
So Root's one WAS out but didn't look out, and the Broad ball might just have clipped a bit of bail, but looked out. And that is proof that the umpires are biased!

That's clutching at straws mate - that's like Fergie's "I've seen them given" argument when he was saying an onside goal should have been disallowed.
Haha SteveTreacle I think you'd get on well with Steve Evans.
 

SteveTreacle

Vital Squad Member
#99
When Root takes five wickets, questions need answers.
Agree - a part-time spinner taking a five-for on Day Two of a Test Match against the best players of spin in the World and then the same player, as a batsman, who is also one of the best players of spin in the world in all manner of problems against the spin and doing well to get to 25!

In England we rely on our seasonal conditions (in the air and on the pitch) to assist our swing and seam bowlers, but we always prepare good pitches (for test matches anyway), which offer something for seam and spin and are good to bat on, if you apply yourself. This pitch on the other hand does not offer anything for seamers and has been a minefield from day 1 for batsman with the ball going through the surface and acting like a day 5 pitch. It's clearly been doctored up. Had a county team produced a wicket like that, they'd have been absolutely hammered by the ECB (in fact Somerset were fined heavily and docked points last season for producing a wicket nowhere near as bad as that). The ICC will do nothing about it though.

Still, it has made for entertainment in a sense! England lost this game in the first two sessions by not getting more runs in the best conditions in the match. Had they got 200, which they were capable of, it may have been close.
 

Captainreblue

Vital Squad Member
If India reach their target of 49 in under 12.4 overs it will be the shortest test match since the second world war.

Home advantage yes, this wicket is just a farce.