1st Test: Australia v South Africa at Brisbane 9-13 Nov

[Hallatia]

there was a definite noise

 

[MSIH]

That's not a no ball.

 

[Hallatia]

very sad. Come on Morne!

 

[Canard]

Dodged a bullet there.

Steyn called that well.

 

[undertaker]

correct call from the 3rd umpire. No part of the foot was behind the line on the landing. Lucky escape for Australia though since Cowan clearly gloved it on the hotspot

 

[MSIH]

What shit is Chappell smoking?

 

[MSIH]

They have to lose the review surely?

They got it wrong, it wasn't out.

 

[drago brelli]

Who is it?......there used to be quite a few playing league.

 

[hineyrulz]

That's not a no ball.

Probably a harsh call but not much different to Siddles.

 

[undertaker]

So, that counts as a 'unsuccessful' review, doesn't it? Don't tell me they get to keep it just because it was a no-ball.

 

[madunit]

Definitely should count

 

[Hallatia]

it does not, they were reviewing it based on a ball the umpire called legitimate (or didn't call illegitimate), the no-ball review is an umpire's review, not the team's review. Team's don't review that

 

[hineyrulz]

Well played Clarke and Cowan.

 

[MSIH]

it does not, they were reviewing it based on a ball the umpire called legitimate (or didn't call illegitimate), the no-ball review is an umpire's review, not the team's review. Team's don't review that

That's bullshit. They reviewed it, and got it wrong. Should count.

Nice work from Cowan & Clarke. Tempted for an afternoon sickie if Clarke lasts the first session.

 

[Hallatia]

their review didn't even come into it, because the umpire had to do his review first and then the South Africa review didn't actually happen. And Australia are lucky it didn't, because Cowan would have been out

 

[Canard]

What is RFL on about?

 

[Hallatia]

And Australia finished the day 3 for Nelson

 

[MSIH]

their review didn't even come into it, because the umpire had to do his review first and then the South Africa review didn't actually happen. And Australia are lucky it didn't, because Cowan would have been out

The 3rd Ump only checks no-balls when the batsman is out. Are umpires going to review no-balls with the 3rd ump every ball now? The no-ball check is a part of every decision referral. This was given not out, so South Africa reviewed, and it was shown to be not-out. Review should count.

 

[Red Bear]

Cowan is the only bloke playing anything sort of like what is needed in test cricket.

Everyone getting excited about Ponting last summer needs to realise slapping around Yadav and Sharma is a bit different to facing these blokes or England. He should have retired last year.

Yep. Big difference having Steyn Morkel and Philander to face.

Average from Warner, dumb shot from Quiney, more of the same from Ponting.

Cowen playing well, Clarke looks miles ahead of the next best bat but having him at five deosnt seem ideal.

Unless you're under 30. If you are you might be dropped 3 tests after scoring 2 100s in a test (Hughes) or 1 test after taking 12 wickets on debut (Krejza).

Krejza us f**king terrible, would get slaughtered with repeated games at this level.

 

[Hallatia]

The 3rd Ump only checks no-balls when the batsman is out. Are umpires going to review no-balls with the 3rd ump every ball now? The no-ball check is a part of every decision referral. This was given not out, so South Africa reviewed, and it was shown to be not-out. Review should count.

I don't make up the rules, what I said is just my understanding of them.

And batsman would have been out were it not for the no ball, which could have gone either way