*Official* England in West Indies

[four_or_six]

I hate the idea of player referrals full-stop, but the correct decision there was out. No doubts about.

I can't quite square it in my mind with the batsman having the benefit of the doubt. I guess closer lbw's like this one are more likely to be given out. I agree with you that it was out, but it's possible the umpire thought it may have just pitched outside leg, or be just going down, and therefore gave the benefit to the batsman.

 

[Bob Bamber]

To clarify -

5. Fair delivery - the feet
For a delivery to be fair in respect of the feet, in the delivery stride
(i) the bowler's back foot must land within and not touching the return crease.
(ii) the bowler's front foot must land with some part of the foot, whether grounded or raised, behind the popping crease.
If the umpire at the bowler's end is not satisfied that both these conditions have been met, he shall call and signal No ball.

 

[Richard]

I can't quite square it in my mind with the batsman having the benefit of the doubt. I guess closer lbw's like this one are more likely to be given out. I agree with you that it was out, but it's possible the umpire thought it may have just pitched outside leg, or be just going down, and therefore gave the benefit to the batsman.

Giving that n\o in real-time wasn't a shocker of a decision, certainly not. You'll notice that at least a couple of people have posted noting how their first reaction was that it either pitched outside or was missing leg (or both). However, viewing on camera, it was clear that neither had happened.

That's why I like the idea of lbws being scrutinised on camera with the red mat and virtual flightpath - I just don't like the decision being made before they are.

 

[four_or_six]

Giving that n\o in real-time wasn't a shocker of a decision, certainly not. You'll notice that at least a couple of people have posted noting how their first reaction was that it either pitched outside or was missing leg (or both). However, viewing on camera, it was clear that neither had happened.

That's why I like the idea of lbws being scrutinised on camera with the red mat and virtual flightpath - I just don't like the decision being made before they are.

I guess I would just rather only shocking decisions were overturned. But how you'd achieve that exactly I'm not sure.

 

[roseboy64]

No, you certainly can. However, the rule is that the foot has to have some part behind the line as it lands, not as the ball is delivered.

Anderson's foot - just - did that.

As David Gower is now confirming as I write this.

Which part of the laws is that in? Oh I see now above what you mean.

 

[tooextracool]

Indeed, in fact good ol Goughy used to often raise part of his back foot in the air after his foot landed behind the crease and that was never called a no ball.

 

[Scaly piscine]

Oh I wish Aggers would stfu about technology. He rambles on and on and on and he hasn't a friggin clue and makes stupid arguments.

 

[Bob Bamber]

I guess I would just rather only shocking decisions were overturned. But how you'd achieve that exactly I'm not sure.

Make it down to one would I guess...

I still don't see why we can't use all of Hawkeye. Surely a 99.9% sure hawkeye is better than guessing based on a projection...It doesn't look good if the projection comes up two minutes later that may have turned the decision. Definatly in the Sarwan case in the first innings.

 

[ozone]

Not been able to watch much of this today, but pretty pleased with the look of the game. How well did Bopara and Ambrose bat? Well enough to have Shah and Prior worried for there places come the summer?

 

[Richard]

Make it down to one would I guess...

I still don't see why we can't use all of Hawkeye. Surely a 99.9% sure hawkeye is better than guessing based on a projection...It doesn't look good if the projection comes up two minutes later that may have turned the decision. Definatly in the Sarwan case in the first innings.

I don't care whether HawkEye is used or not, but I do think it's ridiculous that HotSpot and Snickometer can't be used.

 

[Richard]

Not been able to watch much of this today, but pretty pleased with the look of the game. How well did Bopara and Ambrose bat? Well enough to have Shah and Prior worried for there places come the summer?

Not especially well - both were dropped early in their innings' and obviously England were well on top by the time both arrived at the crease so thus West Indies were fairly demoralised.

Nonetheless, runs are runs as far as selection is concerned and though Prior is likely to come back into the side and Shah is clearly in the side until the end of this series at least, they've shown their credentials.

 

[Woodster]

Not especially well.

?????

 

[Richard]

Well, they didn't. Both will and doubtless have already batted far better than they did today.

Anyway, ball now seems to have stopped swinging - prepare for a long session in the field if West Indies don't start throwing wickets away.

 

[Woodster]

Not been able to watch much of this today, but pretty pleased with the look of the game. How well did Bopara and Ambrose bat? Well enough to have Shah and Prior worried for there places come the summer?

Certainly they gave food for thought, yes the WI were some what down, especially when Ambrose came in after Collingwood and Bopara's excellent partnership.

If there was one slight criticism of Bopara it was that he took the hook shot on (against Edwards) with almost scant recognition of the traps being set and the fielders out waiting. Perhaps he exuded great confidence, despite knowing the field was set out there, he backed himself to split the field, hit over them, or control the hook by playing it down. However, in a different situation I would hope he would use the shot a little more sensibly. That said when Edwards did throw the short ball outside off stump line, he did leave it.

He was very strong off his legs, and played a beautiful on drive. He looked in very good order.

Ambrose came in with a cameo that continued England's impetus, and enabled the declaration to be made, probably earlier than expected (if 600 was always the target). WI were down and he capitalised. Dropped on 0, but a difficult chance for Ramdin standing up to the wicket with quite a deflection.

 

[Scaly piscine]

Make it down to one would I guess...

I still don't see why we can't use all of Hawkeye. Surely a 99.9% sure hawkeye is better than guessing based on a projection...It doesn't look good if the projection comes up two minutes later that may have turned the decision. Definatly in the Sarwan case in the first innings.

Whether or not it's a good idea it won't happen.

There are too many idiots in the loop, ones such as Aggers, who have no idea but will stick their oar in anyway and corrupt the reasoned arguments going on with bollocks. Any sort of proper open debate will just clogged going around in circles because of these know-nothings. It's always the same, things aren't merely debated and decided by the real experts who know what they're doing - the overwhelming mass of idiots have to get involved and give their stupid uninformed opinion and because they're in the majority their voice is the loudest.

I mean for instance for the first couple of years Hawkeye came out these same people were constantly going on about how it wasn't accurate and they don't trust it. Doesn't matter that scientists have been testing it exhaustively to give a proper error margin and so on. These **** who can barely work out how to work a video recorder know better.

 

[Woodster]

Well, they didn't. Both will and doubtless have already batted far better than they did today.

Anyway, ball now seems to have stopped swinging - prepare for a long session in the field if West Indies don't start throwing wickets away.

Yes the ball straight up and down now. May be time for Swanny soon.

If anyone gives a chance you say they haven't batted well, so what you're saying is for them to bat better, basically they just need to eradicate the chance given. It is possible to still bat well despite making an error early in your innings.

I'm not saying they were fantastic, don't get me wrong, they will play in much more testing conditions in the future, but they showed plenty of promise and you cannot say they didn't bat well.

 

[Richard]

Yes the ball straight up and down now. May be time for Swanny soon.

And he gets some turn in his opening over.

If anyone gives a chance you say they haven't batted well, so what you're saying is for them to bat better, basically they just need to eradicate the chance given. It is possible to still bat well despite making an error early in your innings.

I'm not saying they were fantastic, don't get me wrong, they will play in much more testing conditions in the future, but they showed plenty of promise and you cannot say they didn't bat well.

I don't think they batted poorly as such but I don't think they batted well. I wouldn't think either batted especially well even if both had not given the chances the deliveries they did. Both played reasonably after (rather than despite) their early chances, but no more than reasonably. And no, they'd not have had the chance to play reasonably had those chances been taken.

Still, no-one seems agreed on how easy the Ambrose "chance" (or otherwise) actually was.

 

[ozone]

Not especially well - both were dropped early in their innings' and obviously England were well on top by the time both arrived at the crease so thus West Indies were fairly demoralised.

Certainly they gave food for thought, yes the WI were some what down, especially when Ambrose came in after Collingwood and Bopara's excellent partnership.

Thanks. Imagine Ambrose will, somewhat unfortunately, be dropped for the next test. Not really gutted about it as am fairly happy with how Prior is doing ATM. Judging by the scorecard, and what has been said on here, Bopara has probably staked as good a claim on a spot in the side as Shah has to date, so will be interested to see how that pans out.

BTW, bit concerned that this test is destined for a draw. For us to bowl WI out twice, we'll need a few of them to give it away, particularly as I don't think WI will score there runs slowly for long periods.

 

[Richard]

WI will likely have to bat for 170 or so overs to get up toward England's score. It's almost inconceivable there won't be a few lapses before then.

England certainly have hope to win this game. But no-one should imagine it's likely to be easy.

 

[tooextracool]

this pitch is far flatter than the last pitch, absolute beauty to bat on IMO. Would take a herculean effort from someone to get 20 wickets here.