The Ashes 2015
Discussion
bigunit00 said:
You mean when broad clearly edged it to the keeper and was out but acted like he hadn't hit it and stood his ground. If this was able to be reviewed by the third umpire (like stokes today) it would have been out as well. Nice try though.
Yeah like that Broad left it up to the umpires to make a decision . I thought the Aussies would have been proud of him doing what he did. Smith said he he appealed and left it up to the umpires.Both seemed to have forgotten the spirit of the game. The umpires on the field seeing it in full speed gave it a soft not out. 3rd umpire only saw it in slowmo.
zygalski said:
So why stick your arm out to the side to catch the ball then?
He's not trying to catch the ball, it's pure defensive reflex. When the ball hits his glove he's not even looking at it. Try looking it at this way. Persuade (it will be difficult) any top line batsman to stand ten yards away from a top line fast bowler. Tell the batsman that he has to try and catch a ball that the bowler is going to throw at him as hard as he can. Even with prior knowledge his instinct is going to be protection rather than that attempted catch.
Take into account the simple physics of ball velocity and distance and the whole thing falls apart.
Leithen said:
He's not trying to catch the ball, it's pure defensive reflex. When the ball hits his glove he's not even looking at it.
Try looking it at this way. Persuade (it will be difficult) any top line batsman to stand ten yards away from a top line fast bowler. Tell the batsman that he has to try and catch a ball that the bowler is going to throw at him as hard as he can. Even with prior knowledge his instinct is going to be protection rather than that attempted catch.
Take into account the simple physics of ball velocity and distance and the whole thing falls apart.
He was at least 15 yards away.....not 10......big difference Try looking it at this way. Persuade (it will be difficult) any top line batsman to stand ten yards away from a top line fast bowler. Tell the batsman that he has to try and catch a ball that the bowler is going to throw at him as hard as he can. Even with prior knowledge his instinct is going to be protection rather than that attempted catch.
Take into account the simple physics of ball velocity and distance and the whole thing falls apart.
...........next you will say Gooch shouldn't have been out handled the ball years ago as it was "pure defensive reflex". Stokes didn't try and catch it. He just tried to make sure his arm got in the way. If the ball was coming straight at his head I think this is a viable argument but its nowhere near his melon. If Warner was the batsmen and stokes the bowler are we really to believe Morgan that they would have rescinded the appeal......yeah right.....as if
Edited by bigunit00 on Sunday 6th September 08:58
Edited by bigunit00 on Sunday 6th September 09:01
It looks like a reflex reaction to me. But agree that you don't 'avoid' being hit by sticking your arm out. Better off getting body parts out of the way.
Personally, I wouldn't have continued the appeal , but can understand why another player might, especially Starc; it was a very very good piece of cricket to field that in his follow through. Had it been hitting the stumps (looks like it might but not sure without ball tracking) it would have been a brilliant run out.
Personally, I wouldn't have continued the appeal , but can understand why another player might, especially Starc; it was a very very good piece of cricket to field that in his follow through. Had it been hitting the stumps (looks like it might but not sure without ball tracking) it would have been a brilliant run out.
bigunit00 said:
You mean when broad clearly edged it to the keeper and was out but acted like he hadn't hit it and stood his ground. If this was able to be reviewed by the third umpire (like stokes today) it would have been out as well. Nice try though.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=aHhZb-cBKwc
Comparing this to Hughes incident is laughable. The ball was nowhere near him as the pic above shows.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=RISaFCB6Zbohttps://m.youtube.com/watch?v=aHhZb-cBKwc
Comparing this to Hughes incident is laughable. The ball was nowhere near him as the pic above shows.
johnfm said:
It looks like a reflex reaction to me. But agree that you don't 'avoid' being hit by sticking your arm out. Better off getting body parts out of the way.
Personally, I wouldn't have continued the appeal , but can understand why another player might, especially Starc; it was a very very good piece of cricket to field that in his follow through. Had it been hitting the stumps (looks like it might but not sure without ball tracking) it would have been a brilliant run out.
Decent of you to say that John. Personally it looked blatant, stupid and out. The ball was nowhere near his head and lord knows what he was thinking! Personally, I wouldn't have continued the appeal , but can understand why another player might, especially Starc; it was a very very good piece of cricket to field that in his follow through. Had it been hitting the stumps (looks like it might but not sure without ball tracking) it would have been a brilliant run out.
The law talks about intent and the umps viewed it that way he could however have been stopping the ball hitting the stumps just as equally he could have been defending himself. He was judged to have been preventing the ball which in retrospect probably wouldn't have hit the stumps anyway. Nice talking point but don't let it distract anyone from the fact that we were well beaten again. We are having problems with the bat. Top 4 not going big and 5/6/7/8 not contributing in the last 2 games. It's a hard game and the Aussies play it hard no surprises there.
chimster said:
The law talks about intent and the umps viewed it that way he could however have been stopping the ball hitting the stumps just as equally he could have been defending himself. He was judged to have been preventing the ball which in retrospect probably wouldn't have hit the stumps anyway. Nice talking point but don't let it distract anyone from the fact that we were well beaten again. We are having problems with the bat. Top 4 not going big and 5/6/7/8 not contributing in the last 2 games. It's a hard game and the Aussies play it hard no surprises there.
+1. What's happened has happened. In other news, Shane Watson has announced his test retirement....
johnfm said:
It looks like a reflex reaction to me. But agree that you don't 'avoid' being hit by sticking your arm out. Better off getting body parts out of the way.
Personally, I wouldn't have continued the appeal , but can understand why another player might, especially Starc; it was a very very good piece of cricket to field that in his follow through. Had it been hitting the stumps (looks like it might but not sure without ball tracking) it would have been a brilliant run out.
Having watched the replay a few times, to me it looks like his arm is there as a result of his being off balance trying to regain his crease rather than trying to catch tor deflect the ball.Personally, I wouldn't have continued the appeal , but can understand why another player might, especially Starc; it was a very very good piece of cricket to field that in his follow through. Had it been hitting the stumps (looks like it might but not sure without ball tracking) it would have been a brilliant run out.
However had I been in the field I would have appealed and left it up to the umpires which is exactly as it played out and as it should be.
It is easy to sound aggrieved after the heat of the moment is gone but it only takes any one player to even half appeal for a decision to be called for
Edited by suthol on Sunday 6th September 12:42
RichB said:
Decent of you to say that John. Personally it looked blatant, stupid and out. The ball was nowhere near his head and lord knows what he was thinking!
do you honestly think he had anytime to think and make a judgement. I don't blame the Aussies I blame the review process looking at it in slo-mo.Anyway if its not out for Dickie its not out for me.
RichB said:
johnfm said:
It looks like a reflex reaction to me. But agree that you don't 'avoid' being hit by sticking your arm out. Better off getting body parts out of the way.
Personally, I wouldn't have continued the appeal , but can understand why another player might, especially Starc; it was a very very good piece of cricket to field that in his follow through. Had it been hitting the stumps (looks like it might but not sure without ball tracking) it would have been a brilliant run out.
Decent of you to say that John. Personally it looked blatant, stupid and out. The ball was nowhere near his head and lord knows what he was thinking! Personally, I wouldn't have continued the appeal , but can understand why another player might, especially Starc; it was a very very good piece of cricket to field that in his follow through. Had it been hitting the stumps (looks like it might but not sure without ball tracking) it would have been a brilliant run out.
Has anyone who think Stokes did that on purpose ever played cricket to any standard?
If someone goes to throw the ball at you from close range, most peoples instinct is to put your hand up to defend yourself and get out of the way. This is all that happened.
If you think he had the time to think, "hmmm I'm out of my crease I better try and punch the ball away from the stumps", and then execute that plan, either you are an idiot, or you've never been in a remotely similar situation. In both cases you clearly don't have any concept of reaction times or brain/muscle function.
For the people saying the ball was nowhere near him...how long exactly do you think he had to make that decision before deciding to act? People struggle to judge the speed of cars coming down the road 100 yards away at 60MPH, try a cricket ball from 15 yards at 90mph.
If you've only seen the slow-mo then you can't make a proper judgement.
Anyone fancy standing 10-15 yards from a baseball pitcher as he pitches and see if you want to try and push the ball away form some stumps.
Idiotic. I can see why Piggy appealed in the heat of the moment but he should have had the balls to admit he was wrong afterwards, not that I expected him too.
And for Big C-Unit above, the whole Broad edging it thing... If Clarke hadn't wasted his reviews, displaying all the cricket brain of a single-celled amoeba, it wouldn't have been an issue. As it was Broad stood his ground in true Aussie fashion and you boys couldn't stop crying about it. If you live by the sword...
There are too many other instances to count (including in the recent Ashes) but how about this one?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MUQzHIXWiCo
If someone goes to throw the ball at you from close range, most peoples instinct is to put your hand up to defend yourself and get out of the way. This is all that happened.
If you think he had the time to think, "hmmm I'm out of my crease I better try and punch the ball away from the stumps", and then execute that plan, either you are an idiot, or you've never been in a remotely similar situation. In both cases you clearly don't have any concept of reaction times or brain/muscle function.
For the people saying the ball was nowhere near him...how long exactly do you think he had to make that decision before deciding to act? People struggle to judge the speed of cars coming down the road 100 yards away at 60MPH, try a cricket ball from 15 yards at 90mph.
If you've only seen the slow-mo then you can't make a proper judgement.
Anyone fancy standing 10-15 yards from a baseball pitcher as he pitches and see if you want to try and push the ball away form some stumps.
Idiotic. I can see why Piggy appealed in the heat of the moment but he should have had the balls to admit he was wrong afterwards, not that I expected him too.
And for Big C-Unit above, the whole Broad edging it thing... If Clarke hadn't wasted his reviews, displaying all the cricket brain of a single-celled amoeba, it wouldn't have been an issue. As it was Broad stood his ground in true Aussie fashion and you boys couldn't stop crying about it. If you live by the sword...
There are too many other instances to count (including in the recent Ashes) but how about this one?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MUQzHIXWiCo
The natural instinct would be to move out of the way, not try to catch a ball thrown at the stumps.
Stokes has pretty good reflexes. He knows what he's doing. You can't compare his reflexes to a PH'er who played a bit of village cricket 20 years ago.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OymqUkmd358
Stokes has pretty good reflexes. He knows what he's doing. You can't compare his reflexes to a PH'er who played a bit of village cricket 20 years ago.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OymqUkmd358
zygalski said:
The natural instinct would be to move out of the way, not try to catch a ball thrown at the stumps.
Stokes has pretty good reflexes. He knows what he's doing. You can't compare his reflexes to a PH'er who played a bit of village cricket 20 years ago.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OymqUkmd358
Got to punch someone, do they:Stokes has pretty good reflexes. He knows what he's doing. You can't compare his reflexes to a PH'er who played a bit of village cricket 20 years ago.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OymqUkmd358
A. Move out of the way
B. Put their hand up to protect themselves
C. All of the above
Yes he has better reactions than most, but if you think he has sufficient reactions to WILLFULLY try and protect the stumps from the ball in the time it takes a ball to travel 10 yards at 90mph then you are crazy.
In that catch, the ball is going much much slower and he is much further away.
zygalski said:
D. Move out of the way & then stick their hand out to the side, at the same time coincidentally stopping a ball headed towards the stumps & 3 feet clear of the man.
It's this bit I have a problem with, this all happened in around 2 tenths of a second, about half of which he was facing the other way, of course he didn't do this willfully.Gassing Station | Sports | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff