**Official** New Zealand in Australia

[stephen]

Have you got tired of trying to steer the conversation onto other umpiring misdemeaners (sic)?

So by noone commenting, does that mean we're only allowed to discuss it on this forum once we've got an unedited copy of the full match directly from Channel 9?

Have you got tired of misquoting and misunderstanding what I'm saying. I was responding to the people who have only seen the zoomed in slow motion replay and stating that Haddin was cheating or lying.

People have been making slanderous comments and looking at "body language" evidence (which really means they read whatever they want into the players reactions). Is it not equally possible that Haddin was so concentrating on the stumping that it took him a moment to react to the bowled? Is it not also equally possible that the batsman thought that it was an attempted stumping instead of bowled?

This whole incident has me completely amused. We are talking about something that happened over half a dozen frames of television - that is about a quarter of a second of real time.

All I can say is that I would hate for this forum to be the jurors if I was ever up for a serious crime. Reading meaning into Haddin's slightly delayed reaction (which was about half a second). The batsman had no idea what happened as he didn't see the incident, and when he looked around all he could see was the bails off and the ball in Haddin's gloves. And most people here are using these two points as though they were hard evidence of a conspiracy.

Haddin made an error of judgment, the umpires made a small error of judgment and now people are baying for blood over something that did not effect the final result.

 

[_Ed_]

Is it not equally possible that Haddin was so concentrating on the stumping that it took him a moment to react to the bowled? Is it not also equally possible that the batsman thought that it was an attempted stumping instead of bowled?

I'd be surprised, Broom was safely in his crease.

I wondered if that was a possibility too, so did have a look at where Broom's feet were.

 

[social]

Personally, I'd have called it a wide.

What do you mean, it may have hit the bails? May is the operative word here, I feel. If it didn't hit the bails, call it wide and get on with the game, eh Social

Cant get bowled off a wide

 

[KiWiNiNjA]

I can't help but steal someone's dissection of Haddin's comments on another forum:



Puts a whole new perspective on modern cricket. It must have been a mystery ball.

Yeah, thought of that myself.

 

[HeathDavisSpeed]

Haddin made an error of judgment, the umpires made a small error of judgment and now people are baying for blood over something that did not effect the final result.

I expect the umpire was looking at all at the keeper's gloves. To be honest, I think I can only remember one time when a no ball for this offense has been called in an international game. And I can't even remember when that is.

However, it is actually very, very easy to spot when a keeper does this - even if for a split second as the key is that the keeper's gloves have to stay behind the stumps. If the gloves are brought above or beside the stumps to early, it is actually very easy to spot. I speak having called a no ball for this particular offense on several occasions at club level (where this is actually a fairly common failing of club wicket keepers - if you're umpiring a club game, keep a sharp eye for the keeper doing this)

Frankly, I find Haddin hard to believe, but there wouldn't have been this hoo-haa if the umpire had been able to perform their job to the basic acceptable standard for international cricket. I think this is an exceedingly poor thing to get wrong.

 

[Johnners]

Ferguson called up!!!! Yesssssss

http://www.cricket.com.au/default.aspx?s=news-display&id=15288

 

[KiWiNiNjA]

Have you got tired of misquoting and misunderstanding what I'm saying. I was responding to the people who have only seen the zoomed in slow motion replay and stating that Haddin was cheating or lying.

People have been making slanderous comments and looking at "body language" evidence (which really means they read whatever they want into the players reactions). Is it not equally possible that Haddin was so concentrating on the stumping that it took him a moment to react to the bowled? Is it not also equally possible that the batsman thought that it was an attempted stumping instead of bowled?

This whole incident has me completely amused. We are talking about something that happened over half a dozen frames of television - that is about a quarter of a second of real time.

All I can say is that I would hate for this forum to be the jurors if I was ever up for a serious crime. Reading meaning into Haddin's slightly delayed reaction (which was about half a second). The batsman had no idea what happened as he didn't see the incident, and when he looked around all he could see was the bails off and the ball in Haddin's gloves. And most people here are using these two points as though they were hard evidence of a conspiracy.

Haddin made an error of judgment, the umpires made a small error of judgment and now people are baying for blood over something that did not effect the final result.

And you are misunderstanding as well. No conspiracy, just that isn't being entirely truthful about the 100% thing.

There is nothing wrong with looking at reactions, I feel. Haddin showed doubt, heck, look at this video at about 17-18secs you can see Clarke actually asking Haddin for confirmation, so even he had doubt.

Yet you say that at real time there was no doubt?
Clarke is playing at real time.
Haddin is playing at real time.
Broom is playing at real time.

Only Haddin was 100% sure.

 

[HeathDavisSpeed]

Cant get bowled off a wide

That would be some top effort, granted.

 

[pasag]

Changes to Aussie squad

Top of the order looking like a total joke. No doubt Clarke will open and get out for a first ball duck. Katich should be there.

 

[vic_orthdox]

Remember watching Haddin during the series vs SA, thinking that his hands were getting in front of the stumps. Tends to push them forward whilst the ball is coming down, and use this to increase his catching distance. Sometimes he ends up taking the ball in front of the stumps.

All in all, hope Oxenford (sp) is given the sack, he was shocking all night.

 

[Johnners]

Ferguson to blaze a ton.

 

[duffer]

And you are misunderstanding as well. No conspiracy, just that isn't being entirely truthful about the 100% thing.

There is nothing wrong with looking at reactions, I feel. Haddin showed doubt, heck, look at this video at about 17-18secs you can see Clarke actually asking Haddin for confirmation, so even he had doubt.

Yet you say that at real time there was no doubt?
Clarke is playing at real time.
Haddin is playing at real time.
Broom is playing at real time.

Only Haddin was 100% sure.

Those youtube comments are absolute incredible. Especially this one:

Ponting the great master of all bad deeds & has shown his clours agin through brad haddin . he will do this again and agian and also have the audocity to defend such deeds. aussies the sore losers and cheaters are proud of such moments. the umpire should be excused as he's steve buckner who lost his mind it long time ago

Damn there are some morons out there.

 

[social]

Ferguson called up!!!! Yesssssss

Cricket Australia > Latest News > News

WTF?????????????????????????????

Forget what I said about Oz selectors having to go to the second row of the bench!

They've just walked out of the ground, across the road, into the schoolyard and selected 2 kids from the playground that neither side wanted for a game of tip and run

Friggin' unbelievable

 

[KiWiNiNjA]

Ferguson called up!!!! Yesssssss

Cricket Australia > Latest News > News

Hmmm, is that an out of the blue call up, or has he been on the fringes?
I certainly haven't seen his name mentioned on her, iirc.

List A stats dont look that impressive, I suppose hes had a good season this year?

 

[KiWiNiNjA]

Those youtube comments are absolute incredible. Especially this one:

Ponting the great master of all bad deeds & has shown his clours agin through brad haddin . he will do this again and agian and also have the audocity to defend such deeds. aussies the sore losers and cheaters are proud of such moments. the umpire should be excused as he's steve buckner who lost his mind it long time ago

Damn there are some morons out there.

Youtube posters, bottom of the gene pool.

 

[_Ed_]

It's not a bad selection in that NZ will have very little idea how he plays, there's the element of surprise. So we can't really set a plan for him.

It worked for George Bailey in the PM XI game.

 

[_Ed_]

Those youtube comments are absolute incredible. Especially this one:

Ponting the great master of all bad deeds & has shown his clours agin through brad haddin . he will do this again and agian and also have the audocity to defend such deeds. aussies the sore losers and cheaters are proud of such moments. the umpire should be excused as he's steve buckner who lost his mind it long time ago

Damn there are some morons out there.

No matter how good your day has been, reading Youtube comments can turn it all around.

 

[social]

Youtube posters, bottom of the gene pool.

And a pool with too much chlorine in it at that

 

[pasag]

Don't see the logic of Voges > Klinger. Younger, better form, not ginger.

 

[Johnners]

Hmmm, is that an out of the blue call up, or has he been on the fringes?
I certainly haven't seen his name mentioned on her, iirc.

List A stats dont look that impressive, I suppose hes had a good season this year?

??

Notched his maiden OD ton this season. Prior to this season, he's been the sort of batsmen who makes an awesome looking 30-40, then gets out. Has been having a good season though, and converted a few more of those starts in both forms of the game.