Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Nah, nah did just about sum it up.


I'm not keen on furreners playing for England and I certainly thought KP was an arrogant tosspot, but to give him credit, he does seem to have responded rather maturely to the captaincy, and lost some of his ego (or at least learned to hide it).


But despite trouncing SA on the last two one dayers, the grown up tests are the ones that count and we failed. I reckon the SA team were just resting on their laurels a little too much, besides, what have they got to prove?

Great that England is 3 - 0 up but I always feel the Duckworth - Lewis calculations give the advantage to the team batting second with fewer overs to face the likelihood of them losing wickets is reduced. So - to an extent SA were unfortunate on Sunday.
  • 4 weeks later...

The International Cricket Council have confirmed that a series of amendments to playing conditions are to take effect.


... Additionally, all catches can now be referred to the third umpire when the on-field officials are unsure as to the validity of an appeal.


I quite like watching slow action replays and even waiting for third umpire decisions, but I can't help feeling we are moving away from the human element - bad/good umpiring decisions are part of the fun.


What do you think?

I?m all for using technology to make umpiring more accurate but I do think that this referring business can be a waste of time sometimes. I also don?t think that the teams should be able to ask for a decision to be referred, as they have experimented with. It just invites silly buggery from the captains. Especially with the, shall we say less scrupulous, approach to the game the colonials have.
  • 2 weeks later...

This is patently not cricket:


England's Test series against West Indies this winter will use the umpire decision review system.


The system - trialled during the recent series between India and Sri Lanka - allows a side up to three appeals against a decision per innings.


The International Cricket Council confirmed on Tuesday it will be implemented during England's four Test matches in the Caribbean in February and March 2009.

Can one of you knowledgable folk fill me in on this new techno babble?


What does it enable to be reviewed? I'm guessing lbw decisions are the main fodder. Or the odd grounded catch.


Otherwise I can't work it out. Run outs are sent to the 3rd umpire anyways.

Would you care to name that time, SimonM? Cricket's always been full of selfish, cheating hypocrites. It's part of its charm.


David, batting and bowling teams can refer any type of decision they disagree with - up to three unsuccessful appeals per innings. The third umpire will then use slow mo repeats (but not other gadgetry such as Hawkeye, HotSpot or Snicko) to give a decision.


It was used in the recent Sri Lanka/ India series. Sri Lanka seemed to be much better at judging a dodgy call than India, from memory. There were 48 referrals in three tests.

I don?t have a problem with technology being used but a proper decision should be made on it and it should be controlled by the umpire.


So if they decide that all LBW decisions will be automatically determined by hawkeye and relayed to the umpire on a little walkie-talkie or something, then fine.


What I don?t like is this business of the teams being able to ask for referrals to the 3rd umpire. Firstly they?re second guessing the umpire which shouldn?t happen. Next thing they will be openly arguing with them (like the mercenaries employed in that gambling pastime for feral miscreants that befouls our tv screens do) Secondly it causes unseemly hold-ups in the game while the captains appeal to the umpires like a bunch of whingeing schoolgirls.


It?s a captain?s job to lead his team not try to manipulate the umpire.


It?s a sport. In real sports you play the fucking game, you don?t question the fucking umpire. I don?t care how much money they?re being paid it doesn?t give a grown man the excuse to behave like a child in need of a hiding.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Tommy has been servicing our boiler for a number of years now and has also carried out repairs for us.  His service is brilliant; he’s reliable, really knowledgeable and a lovely guy.  Very highly recommended!
    • I have been using Andy for many years for decorating and general handyman duties. He always does a great job, is very friendly and his prices are competitive. Highly recommend.
    • Money has to be raised in order to slow the almost terminal decline of public services bought on through years of neglect under the last government. There is no way to raise taxes that does not have some negative impacts / trade offs. But if we want public services and infrastructure that work then raise taxes we must.  Personally I'm glad that she is has gone some way to narrowing the inheritance loop hole which was being used by rich individuals (who are not farmers) to avoid tax. She's slightly rebalanced the burden away from the young, putting it more on wealthier pensioners (who let's face it, have been disproportionately protected for many, many years). And the NICs increase, whilst undoubtedly inflationary, won't be directly passed on (some will, some will likely be absorbed by companies); it's better than raising it on employees, which would have done more to depress growth. Overall, I think she's sailed a prudent course through very choppy waters. The electorate needs to get serious... you can't have European style services and US levels of tax. Borrowing for tax cuts, Truss style, it is is not. Of course the elephant in the room (growing ever larger now Trump is in office and threatening tariffs) is our relationship with the EU. If we want better growth, we need a closer relationship with our nearest and largest trading block. We will at some point have to review tax on transport more radically (as we see greater up take of electric vehicles). The most economically rational system would be one of dynamic road pricing. But politically, very difficult to do
    • Labour was right not to increase fuel duty - it's not just motorists it affects, but goods transport. Fuel goes up, inflation goes up. Inflation will go up now anyway, and growth will stagnate, because businesses will pass the employee NIC hikes onto customers.  I think farms should be exempt from the 20% IHT. I don't know any rich famers, only ones who work their fingers to the bone. But it's in their blood and taking that, often multi-generation, legacy out of the family is heart-breaking. Many work to such low yields, and yet they'll often still bring a lamb to the vet, even if the fees are more than the lamb's life (or death) is worth. Food security should be made a top priority in this country. And, even tho the tax is only for farms over £1m, that's probably not much when you add it all up. I think every incentive should be given to young people who want to take up the mantle. 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...