What's new
The Front Row Forums

Register a free account today to become a member of the world's largest Rugby League discussion forum! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

4th CB Series ODI: AUS v IND @ MCG

Messages
33,280
Azkatro said:
Are you nuts? How many shots have you seen really come onto the bat in this entire match? Probably a few drives are all I can remember, they might as well have rolled the pitch with a plow.

good. give the bowlers something. i'm sick of hearing about a bowler dominated match being boring and sh*t when it's actually most of the time better than a match with a combined total of 600 +

about time we saw a bowler dominated match and the batsmen actually had to work for their runs
 

Pensacola Q.C

Juniors
Messages
1,051
Bazal said:
Oh? Because you don't agree with it? You cannot be stumped off a no ball, why a wide? I fail to see the logic in allowing a batsman to be stumped off one variety of illegal delivery but not another...all a spinner is doing when he pushes the ball wide to an advancing batsman is deliberately bowling an illegal delivery to prevent him hitting it...

Lee gets Gambhir, 3/89
Part of the strategy sometimes when getting a batsman stumped off a wide is to push it through quicker. That's just a good adjustment by the bowler and good work by the keeper. Overstepping the popping crease to beat the batsman for pace and getting the wicket that way gives the bowler an unfair advantage. Hence you can get stumped off a wide but not a no ball.

You also forget that keepers often have to do good, sometimes exceptional, work, to stump a batsman off a wide. It offers an extra dimension to the challenge of being a keeper as well as enabling a true partnership between bowler and keeper when the delivery is pre-planned. My brother who is wicket keeper occasionally planned with medium pacers to get them to push the ball past the pads down leg side which sometimes resulted in batsmen lifting their back leg to flick the ball through square leg and then getting stumped.

And yeah, it might be an illogical rule if the batsman was obligated to leave the crease on every delivery but they're not. That why in over 100 years there has not been to my knowledge one person who has made that brain-dead suggestion rule change until you did.
 

BWNB

First Grade
Messages
7,943
Tonearm Terrorwrist said:
good. give the bowlers something. i'm sick of hearing about a bowler dominated match being boring and sh*t when it's actually most of the time better than a match with a combined total of 600 +

about time we saw a bowler dominated match and the batsmen actually had to work for their runs


Agreed, at least its not a batsmens paradise.
 

Bazal

Post Whore
Messages
101,671
Pensacola Q.C said:
Part of the strategy sometimes when getting a batsman stumped off a wide is to push it through quicker. That's just a good adjustment by the bowler and good work by the keeper. Overstepping the popping crease to beat the batsman for pace and getting the wicket that way gives the bowler an unfair advantage. Hence you can get stumped off a wide but not a no ball.

You also forget that keepers often have to do good, sometimes exceptional, work, to stump a batsman off a wide. It offers an extra dimension to the challenge of being a keeper as well as enabling a true partnership between bowler and keeper when the delivery is pre-planned. My brother who is wicket keeper occasionally planned with medium pacers to get them to push the ball past the pads down leg side which sometimes resulted in batsmen lifting their back leg to flick the ball through square leg and then getting stumped.

And yeah, it might be an illogical rule if the batsman was obligated to leave the crease on every delivery but they're not. That why in over 100 years there has not been to my knowledge one person who has made that brain-dead suggestion rule change until you did.

I never suggested that they change the rule, just stated that it's not one I agree with. I know why the rule is there and that it will not (to my knowledge) be changed, but does that mean I have to agree with it?
 

Pensacola Q.C

Juniors
Messages
1,051
BlacK_WhitE_N_BluE said:
Agreed, at least its not a batsmens paradise.
One day wickets should be batting paradises. It seems that when they're not they also deteriorate a little too much at night for my liking.
 

Pensacola Q.C

Juniors
Messages
1,051
Bazal said:
I never suggested that they change the rule, just stated that it's not one I agree with. I know why the rule is there and that it will not (to my knowledge) be changed, but does that mean I have to agree with it?
So you don't agree with the rule but dont think it should be changed. Gotcha.
 

Bazal

Post Whore
Messages
101,671
Pensacola Q.C said:
So you don't agree with the rule but dont think it should be changed. Gotcha.

I think that, especially with the current ODI rules governing wide bowling, there isn't much that will make it better. Perhaps if the wide rules were relaxed, then I would like it to be changed...but until such a time there really isn't any better solution. Doesn't mean I like it
 
Messages
33,280
Pensacola Q.C said:
One day wickets should be batting paradises. It seems that when they're not they also deteriorate a little too much at night for my liking.

why? batsmen should be made to work for their runs. there's already enough against bowlers as it is
 

Pensacola Q.C

Juniors
Messages
1,051
Bazal said:
I think that, especially with the current ODI rules governing wide bowling, there isn't much that will make it better. Perhaps if the wide rules were relaxed, then I would like it to be changed...but until such a time there really isn't any better solution. Doesn't mean I like it
Your reasoning makes no sense but I'm not gonna argue...at least its an original idea.:D
 

Bazal

Post Whore
Messages
101,671
Credit to Rohit and Dhoni...they batted really well against an attack that was putting everything they had into every ball. It will be interesting to see how both teams back up from this game actually; Australia were completely dominated with the ball but bowled brilliantly and without luck, and India were very similar but had the luck with the ball and managed to fight through with the bat. I thought Brett Lee was probably our best, and both Sharmas were excellent for India.

Also, it was great to see a tough, hard fought ODI for once that wasn't dominated by big shots and flashy batting

EDIT-Jeez, in all the craziness of the last ten overs or so I forgot Sachin's great little innings...
 

Angry_eel

First Grade
Messages
8,624
it wasn't pretty but India finally got a win. All credit to I.Sharma and R.Sharma. Yuvraj needs to fix himself up right now, maybe he's been thinking about Deepika Padukone too much,
 

Timmah

LeagueUnlimited News Editor
Staff member
Messages
100,958
Great work India. Looked tight for a little while after Yuvraj went but all in all India definitely the better side today.
 

dubopov

Coach
Messages
14,737
A couple of points..

1. Did Koertzen get MOM ??

2. Is the ACB demanding that he be sacked or we will leave home and not play here ??
 

Blaze

Juniors
Messages
1,375
Bazal said:
I think the whole system is silly...wides included. Blokes are missing balls that practically clip their pads and they are called wide..maybe it's the fast bowler in me but that is ridiculous. Wides need to be wider, for lack of a better word, to begin with IMO. So no, I have no problem if the ball is hittable, BUT under the current rules I personally don't agree with people being stumped of a delivery the games heirarchy deems that they are unable to effectively play

so what happens if a batsman charges a wide and misses? He can just stand out of his ground?

there is nothing wrong with the law imo
 

lockyno1

Post Whore
Messages
53,231
Typical Rudi wrecking a whole game. Gosh him and Aleem Dar are the WORST two umpires around, and Clown Bowden right behind them!
 

Latest posts

Top