**Official** New Zealand in Australia

[KiWiNiNjA]

Quick, your veges are boiling

Was mine, tbh.
Don't worry, caught them in time.

 

[Son Of Coco]

Quick, your veges are boiling

That's not my veges

 

[Son Of Coco]

Was mine, tbh.
Don't worry, caught them in time.

So my reply fits in nicely.

 

[Zinzan]

My honest opinion (which is a pure guess going by instinct) is that Haddin really wasn't sure what had happened, whereas McCullum had no inkling that there was an edge (given that the bat and ball were miles away from pad/glove etc and there was absolutely no sound or deflection) and just appealed, probably because it was a wide. For me, that's stone cold cheating, but I guess since it was a less novel incident it doesn't get any scrutiny.

I feel more for Haddin who is forced into confusing circumstances by a strange turn of events, whereas as I said, McCullum has basically just gone "righto, I'll randomly appeal and hopefully get a wicket when I know it's not out".

I don't buy that, whilst replays showed Dussey didn't hit it, there was a noise. Ian Chappell commentating at the time even said he heard something. Interesting to know you think McCullum's a stone cold cheat though

 

[99*]

I hope we destroy Aussie in the next few, resting Ponting and Hussey. ****s. Most annoying thing, waiting to face the team you want to beat the most and then they go around and pick (no offence intended) no names to face you.

 

[thierry henry]

I don't think people are that "cut up" about the actual dismissal, just the bolded part and following statement by said player.

Anyways.....

Players appeal when they are not sure all the time, because of the risk that by not appealing, or tempering their appeal with an "I'm not sure", the umpires will decline to give a legitimate dismissal out.

I have a massive problem with McCullum appealing when there wasn't even any hint of bat on ball though. Cricket's moral logic can be a strange thing.

 

[Precambrian]

This says it all the ball is already in his gloves and the bails have not moved a mm..he should have known it.... what ever cricket i have played tell me he should have known it

His slum/hangdog expression for almost 3-4 seconds post the stumps dislodging showed his brain is operating at UNIVAC speeds.

 

[thierry henry]

I don't buy that, whilst replays showed Dussey didn't hit it, there was a noise. Ian Chappell commentating at the time even said he heard something. Interesting to know you think McCullum's a stone cold cheat though

lol Ian Chappell said that because McCullum's appeal was so convincing

There was nothing. You can watch it a million times- nothing. Have you ever seen snicko so unresponsive? An ant farting in Timbuktu would have moved the line more.

Claiming a catch you know is not out when you're the only bloke on the field appealing is cheating, yes.

 

[Son Of Coco]

his slumdog expression for almost 3-4 seconds post the stumps dislodging showed his brain is operating at univac speeds.

Which is funny really, that's exactly what you rely on when you post in here hoping to get a positive response isn't it!?

 

[Precambrian]

then what about tait who appealed for the lbw after a big inside edge by the poor angel Brendon

Karma dude.

 

[pup11]

Players appeal when they are not sure all the time, because of the risk that by not appealing, or tempering their appeal with an "I'm not sure", the umpires will decline to give a legitimate dismissal out.

I have a massive problem with McCullum appealing when there wasn't even any hint of bat on ball though. Cricket's moral logic can be a strange thing.

You talking about the Dussey' dismissal..?

Anyways was Broom's dismissal referred to the 3rd umpire?

 

[Zinzan]

Players appeal when they are not sure all the time, because of the risk that by not appealing, or tempering their appeal with an "I'm not sure", the umpires will decline to give a legitimate dismissal out.

I have a massive problem with McCullum appealing when there wasn't even any hint of bat on ball though. Cricket's moral logic can be a strange thing.

I'm surprised you can't see the difference between a hopeful appeal where you just hear a slight noise and appeal like McCullum's ( which is common-place in cricket) & a quite unique situation where a keeper knocks the bail off with his glove on a bowled decision & then claims he was 100% sure after the event

 

[Precambrian]

If I nicked it, I always walked but then again on the rare occasion that I did nick one, it was a wide so not out

Ever since my rant yesterday, Social seems to have notched it up quite a few!

 

[thierry henry]

You talking about the Dussey' dismissal..?

Anyways was Broom's dismissal referred to the 3rd umpire?

Yes

No

 

[vic_orthdox]

I don't buy that, whilst replays showed Dussey didn't hit it, there was a noise. Ian Chappell commentating at the time even said he heard something. Interesting to know you think McCullum's a stone cold cheat though

Vital thing for mine was that the seam didn't change after Hussey.

The other one at the time was how Patel didn't go up. But then I thought about it myself, and I reckon there's quite a few times where as a spin bowler, concentrating on my follow through, and I don't hear the nick but go up with the keeper after a delayed reaction. I ask "Did he hit it?", and they all tell me that he smashed it, and so I shut up.

 

[Zinzan]

Off to bed fellas. For the record I have a feeling NZ will get mauled in the remaining games even without Ponting, our batting is just too thin without Styris, Ryder, Oram & even Franklin down the order. Of course I do hope I'm wrong.

 

[thierry henry]

I'm surprised you can't see the difference between a hopeful appeal where you just hear a slight noise and appeal like McCullum's ( which is common-place in cricket) & a quite unique situation where a keeper knocks the bail off with his glove on a bowled decision & then claims he was 100% sure after the event

ok, I'll clarify- I can't say for sure whether McCullum heard anything, but personally I think he didn't, because there just wasn't anything to hear, plus there's the whole "appeal for every wide" thing (usually reserved for when there's a hint of some bat/pad/glove involved).

My feeling is that he didn't hear anything, and if that is the case then he cheated.

I agree that what Haddin said after the event was stupid, but what actually happened on the field was more confusing than anything else, in terms of what Haddin should have done.

In a perfect world you'd tell the umpires what happened, but then again in a perfect world you'd have full confidence in the umpires knowing what to do in such a situation.

 

[Precambrian]

Which is funny really, that's exactly what you rely on when you post in here hoping to get a positive response isn't it!?

Why do you get so arsed up everytime someone posts something against an Aussie cricketer, even when it contains zilch bad-blood? You would put some Indian hardcore **** fans to shame.

 

[pup11]

His slumdog expression for almost 3-4 seconds post the stumps dislodging showed his brain is operating at UNIVAC speeds.

I think what you are doing is accusing Haddin of intentionally removing the stumps with his gloves, and if that indeed was his plan then he won't have behaved in such a confused way after the dismissal.

I think Haddin knew something was wrong with dismissal and mistake that he committed at that time was he didn't say to the umpires that he wasn't sure about it.

To mask this, he is now saying he is 100% sure the ball flicked the bails and making a complete fool out of himself.

 

[_Ed_]

I don't agree with it, but wicketkeepers often appeal to discourage the umpire from calling a wide. Wish it didn't happen, but unfortunately it does. Haven't seen a keeper who hasn't done that.