• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

***Official*** India in Australia

burr

burr

State Vice-Captain
Perm said:
ITSTL. Pretty tactless from Ponting, but I've come to expect that kind of thing from him over the years.
Click to expand...
What was that about, re: Grieg, Ponting? Ponting was very fired up - that and then making comments to Clarke when he was on tv. Chill Ricky, it's not a good look.

I'm pleased Johnson and Hogg didn't star on day 5. More of a chance Tait could play in Perth.
 
vic_orthdox

vic_orthdox

Global Moderator
FaaipDeOiad said:
Way to miss the point. You can laugh at him all you want, but there's nothing wrong with standing there and waiting for a decision, regardless of the circumstances. He was perfectly within his rights to do so, just like Ganguly was. None of us know why Clarke was standing there BTW, so your assumptions are of no more value than anyone elses, but assuming you're right (I don't know if you are, I find it hard to imagine why he'd wait for a decision on such an obvious dismissal), it may have been strange or stupid or whatever, but it certainly wasn't cheating, nor is it evidence of any sort of umpiring conspiricy. People frothing at the mouth over it (and yes, they did) and carrying on like he's some sort of monster is absurd and over the top.

For what it's worth, 've got no interest in defending his decision to stand there, because I don't know why he did it and I don't think it's particularly relevant. If he was indeed waiting for a decision because he thought he wouldn't be given out it's astonishingly stupid, but I don't see how it reflects on his honesty as a player or anything. He's not under any obligation under the rules or otherwise to leave before he's given out.
Click to expand...
Meh, you hang around for an obvious dismissal, and you get a spray from the fielding team. Life moves on.
 
FaaipDeOiad

FaaipDeOiad

Hall of Fame Member
SirBloody Idiot said:
I tend to think it would have gone unnoticed in any other match - its just this one has had some average decisions and, in this thread in particular, every Australian player has been criticised for minute things (Ponting has been attacked for no reason consistently) that the situation was blown out of perspective.

Wasn't brilliant timing for him to do it, though.
Click to expand...
Yeah, basically. It was a nothing incident that never warranted any significant attention, whether it was from commentators or from people here. At most it was weird, it certainly wasn't sinister.
 
Days of Grace

Days of Grace

International Captain
vic_orthdox said:
Enough baiting, thanks.
Click to expand...
Allright then,

In all seriousness, bad umpiring has cost India this test match. And anyone else who thinks otherwise is in denial.

Cricket was not the winner. The only justice would have been if India hung on, but they couldn't. Geez, I mean, if Symonds was given out when the score was 190 or thereabouts, India would have been chasing no more than 230 to win this match.

Now, I want to say this: Brad Hogg, in the best conditions he will ever get as a test spinner, did not take a single wicket in the second innings. I feel that Australia may bring in Tait for him now, esp. since the next test is in Perth.
 
archie mac

archie mac

International Coach
Days of Grace said:
Allright then,

In all seriousness, bad umpiring has cost India this test match. And anyone else who thinks otherwise is in denial.

Cricket was not the winner. The only justice would have been if India hung on, but they couldn't. Geez, I mean, if Symonds was given out when the score was 190 or thereabouts, India would have been chasing no more than 230 to win this match.

Now, I want to say this: Brad Hogg, in the best conditions he will ever get as a test spinner, did not take a single wicket in the second innings. I feel that Australia may bring in Tait for him now, esp. since the next test is in Perth.
Click to expand...
It is his home ground though, the young fellow might miss?
 
Smudge

Smudge

Hall of Fame Member
Geoff Lawson pulled no punches on the radio commentary either - said he didn't blame Kumble for not shaking Benson's hand and said "Symonds is shaking the umpires' hands, and so he should."
 
SirBloody Idiot

SirBloody Idiot

Cricketer Of The Year
Days of Grace said:
Cricket was not the winner. The only justice would have been if India hung on, but they couldn't. Geez, I mean, if Symonds was given out when the score was 190 or thereabouts, India would have been chasing no more than 230 to win this match.
Click to expand...
Disagree with that. Australia would have in all likelihood still made upwards of 250 in their first innings. At the end of the day, they could've made many more than 400 runs in the second innings as well, considering Gilchrist and Hogg went out without trying to play themselves in and Hussey was unbeaten on a ton.

If Symonds has been dismissed - I still think a draw would've been the likely result.
 
FaaipDeOiad

FaaipDeOiad

Hall of Fame Member
Yeah, as much as I like Hogg, I think his place needs to be under serious scrutiny for the next test, especially if the WACA pitch is expected to help seamers. I'd give Johnson another game, just because he's shown flashes of ability and I think it'd be harsh to drop a young guy after four tests when he hasn't been horrible, but Hogg's not offering a hell of a lot with the ball given that 6 wickets fell to spinners today and he never looked much like taking one.

Tait for Hogg is a very real possibility.
 
SirBloody Idiot

SirBloody Idiot

Cricketer Of The Year
Voltman said:
Geoff Lawson pulled no punches on the radio commentary either - said he didn't blame Kumble for not shaking Benson's hand and said "Symonds is shaking the umpires' hands, and so he should."
Click to expand...
I think its poor form by Kumble, to be honest. Benson is only human and he made some mistakes he can't rectify without the ability to call for the third umpire. I can understand being pissed off about the decision, but it isn't as if either of them set out just to stick it up their arses.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top