RientO wrote: ↑Sun Aug 25, 2019 9:27 pm
Must admit that England are very lucky. Had the Aussies not wasted their last review on a pretty desperate LBW and had it when England still needed a run to tie, they would have won. Same with World Cup Final. Still glad to beat the convicts.
Wouldn’t say that was down to England being lucky though, more like the Aussies made a rank bad decision to burn there last review because of the pressure a great England fight back had put them under
Aussies lost the plot which made the victory even sweeter
RientO wrote: ↑Sun Aug 25, 2019 9:27 pm
Must admit that England are very lucky. Had the Aussies not wasted their last review on a pretty desperate LBW and had it when England still needed a run to tie, they would have won. Same with World Cup Final. Still glad to beat the convicts.
Wouldn’t say that was down to England being lucky though, more like the Aussies made a rank bad decision to burn there last review because of the pressure a great England fight back had put them under
Aussies lost the plot which made the victory even sweeter
The umpire made the bad decision and there was sweet F.A. the Aussies could do about it.
That written, I think something similar should be done with rugby and football that the reviews are limited. Some of the games this weekend were farcical with all the delays for nothing. Managers should get 2 reviews/game and if they are wrong they lose it.
OVER 125: ENG 357/9 (Stokes 131*, Leach 0*) - target 359
Ball one: dot
Ball two: dot
Ball three: Big hit, there's a man in the deep! I think my heart stopped while this was in the air, and it flies over the rope!! Six runs!
Ball four: dot
Ball five: Ben Stokes reverse sweeps, Leach goes for the single but Stokes isn't interested, Leach it absolutely miles out of his ground as the throw comes in.
FUMBLE!!!! OH MY GOD THIS IS UNBELIEVABLE! Lyon doesn't take the ball in and England survive! What on earth is happening!
Ball six: Sweep attempt, huge lbw shout. It's got to be out but Umpire Wilson says no, and Australia have no review left. And looking at review. He would have been out.
Lovejoy wrote: ↑Sun Aug 25, 2019 11:29 pm
I only watched the highlights, what an innings. Stokes rode his luck at times but that is the way it is sometimes.
The only discussion point now
Is was it better than Beefy's 1981 Headingley performance ?
It’s how many that fill the ground over the 5 days that counts by the way, not the number of seats
Yup
91000+.bums on seats at the MCG
28,000 atnLords
Englands biggest test ground
"Bar none"
I think you said
Yeah good one, Aussies get about 10,000 in there when it’s a test match that isn’t the ashes and also after the first day.
Great example tho
But the ashes is.there biggest rivalry
Even if they only half sell the.mcg it.virtually double Lords .
So again English cricket.is not the BEST supported in the world .
India would win that outright no challenge fron any other nation.
Lovejoy wrote: ↑Sun Aug 25, 2019 11:29 pm
I only watched the highlights, what an innings. Stokes rode his luck at times but that is the way it is sometimes.
The only discussion point now
Is was it better than Beefy's 1981 Headingley performance ?
Is it worth discussing to argue that one performance was better than the other? They were both great efforts and there should be no winner or loser.
I won't take anything away from Stokes and what a brilliant game that was (if you're English of course).
The only disappointing fact was that England only won in the end because of a bad umpiring decision. How many bad umpiring decisions have there been in this Ashes so far? I must admit I don't know much about the umpires because they should be anonymous (a bit like a good referee), but that's not possible now with the review system. Are the umpires in this series the usual ones, or have they deliberately chosen bad umpires?
I don't know how it works with umpires but surely these umpires should be sacked and not allowed to spoil future test matches.
I agree that we've seen some pretty poor umpiring decisions.
BUT
IF the DRS was used to correct clear and obvious howlers by the Umpires, then these howlers would be (and are) reversed (and the appealing team's review is retained). The problem comes when a team burns their review in desperation to try to hope to get a wicket/save a batsman.
There's been some terrible use of DRS in recent weeks, by both England and Australia - I do hope both camps are working on that.
bobo66 wrote: ↑Tue Aug 27, 2019 1:21 pm
The only disappointing fact was that England only won in the end because of a bad umpiring decision. How many bad umpiring decisions have there been in this Ashes so far?
Far too many. A number of reviews have resulted in a change of decision. And there were reviews not taken where the decision would have been changed had they been taken. This one was possibly the worst given the position the game was in, but there is the argument the match would never got to that point if EVERY decision was correct.
Still, the Aussies are going ape-sh!t over it. Good :-)
The only disappointing fact was that England only won in the end because of a bad umpiring decision. How many bad umpiring decisions have there been in this Ashes so far? I must admit I don't know much about the umpires because they should be anonymous (a bit like a good referee), but that's not possible now with the review system. Are the umpires in this series the usual ones, or have they deliberately chosen bad umpires?
Disappointment at England winning doesn't even scratch the surface.
From the little I know and understand about cricket I believe I can assist in answering your question about the umpires. They cheated for England and secured their win just like the ref and linos in the '66 World Cup.
Max B Gold wrote: ↑Tue Aug 27, 2019 1:49 pm
From the little I know and understand about cricket I believe I can assist in answering your question about the umpires. They cheated for England and secured their win just like the ref and linos in the '66 World Cup.
With retrospective decision making, it's likely that many teams would not have won various competitions.
1966 World Cup final is a good example. Goal line technology most likely would have meant England's third was not given and the fourth should not have been given as there were people on the pitch. A replay would have been played the following Tuesday evening. And if the replay finished as a draw? The World Cup winners would have been decided by a lottery.
But then it's possible that had Argentina beat the Germans in the group game, it would never had happened like that at all.
bobo66 wrote: ↑Tue Aug 27, 2019 1:21 pm
I won't take anything away from Stokes and what a brilliant game that was (if you're English of course).
The only disappointing fact was that England only won in the end because of a bad umpiring decision. How many bad umpiring decisions have there been in this Ashes so far? I must admit I don't know much about the umpires because they should be anonymous (a bit like a good referee), but that's not possible now with the review system. Are the umpires in this series the usual ones, or have they deliberately chosen bad umpires?
I don't know how it works with umpires but surely these umpires should be sacked and not allowed to spoil future test matches.
Im not English & i hate cricket
But i can still see it was a brilliant finish to a
Resonably awful game.
Remember 1st innings of 67.
Aggers has said it was the best game he has ever seen
Lots saying its better than beefy 81 because stokes only had 1 partner to get the runs required.
I just thought it was great because you could see fear & passion . Seems to be rare in cricket
Tuffers, I agree it was a great end to the game and also exciting.
I'm really surprised that you are not English and you hate cricket. I would have thought that with your username the opposite would have been true. Obviously best not to read too much into usernames.
bobo66 wrote: ↑Tue Aug 27, 2019 3:46 pm
Tuffers, I agree it was a great end to the game and also exciting.
I'm really surprised that you are not English and you hate cricket. I would have thought that with your username the opposite would have been true. Obviously best not to read too much into usernames.
bobo66 wrote: ↑Tue Aug 27, 2019 3:46 pm
Tuffers, I agree it was a great end to the game and also exciting.
I'm really surprised that you are not English and you hate cricket. I would have thought that with your username the opposite would have been true. Obviously best not to read too much into usernames.
Oh I dunno, my usernames Bonio and I've been chewed on by some dogs in my time.
