*Official* England in South Africa

[Scaly piscine]

Getting back to the game more specifically, the top 7 should have just batted and batted. I don't think it's fair to expect the last 4 to do that though. They're not really good enough to be adapting particularly, so should just keep playing their own way until you've got a situation like 100 to win with 5 overs left of the Test match.

 

[Athlai]

Who cares I thought that call was plum as soon as I saw it and JP agreed. Shocked that Boucher thought otherwise.

 

[Prince EWS]

In a way yes it's good. But you get a situation where Murali is ripping it in and you could just make speculative calls on when to review it. It would become rather random, like gambling then. Is it going to hit enough of the stumps? Is it going to miss altogether? In situations like that it is virtually impossible to judge, but you know if it's say a Kallis and you've got the tail with him then it's worth throwing the dice.

Yeah, I do agree with that, and it's one of many reasons why I don't like the idea of players being in charge of reviews. It adds an entirely different dimesion to the game that one needs to follow and take account of. The review variable skews the raw contest nearly as much as the bad decision variable did IMO.

I'm all for the use of technology and I'm all for more batsmen being given out lbw due to it if they're proven to be out to the letter of the law, but I don't really like the system as it stands at the moment. I'd be much happier if they just let the umpires send any serious appeals upstairs for a look like they do with run-outs - true referrals rather than reviews. Then the naked eye becomes almost irrelevant, as it should be.

 

[zaremba]

Swann is such a great batsman to watch.

 

[GIMH]

Who cares I thought that call was plum as soon as I saw it and JP agreed. Shocked that Boucher thought otherwise.

Am sure you'd say that if the kiwis were involved

 

[zaremba]

I'm all for the use of technology and I'm all for more batsmen being given out lbw due to it if they're proven to be out to the letter of the law, but I don't really like the system as it stands at the moment. I'd be much happier if they just let the umpires send any serious appeals upstairs for a look like they do with run-outs - true referrals rather than reviews. Then the naked eye becomes almost irrelevant, as it should be.

Yes but given that they only have human eyes (and ears (and most dangerous of all "common sense")) they will still make howlers. And if they make howlers, they won't know about it, but the players will. And that's one of a number of powerful reasons why it's a good idea to let the players decide whether to refer/review.

 

[Athlai]

Am sure you'd say that if the kiwis were involved

It looked perfect you have to admit!

 

[GIMH]

It looked perfect you have to admit!

Following on cricinfo at work, so I'll admit nothing!

TBH I have no problem with him being out if he's out, as EWS has pointed out my whingeing is largely in jest. But there's no point having a system like this if it's not going to be applied properly. Same when we were in the Windies, it wasn't used properly, to the detriment of both sides/

 

[Prince EWS]

Yes but given that they only have human eyes (and ears (and most dangerous of all "common sense")) they will still make howlers.

Not if they refer all serious appeals they won't. I'm talking about never actually giving anyone out live unless they walk, and referring anything they consider even possibly out. It'd take up a bit of time, but taking up time >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> getting stuff wrong, and perhaps even more importantly, taking up time >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> creating vast inconsistencies in decision-making which is what the current system does.

 

[Athlai]

Following on cricinfo at work, so I'll admit nothing!

TBH I have no problem with him being out if he's out, as EWS has pointed out my whingeing is largely in jest. But there's no point having a system like this if it's not going to be applied properly. Same when we were in the Windies, it wasn't used properly, to the detriment of both sides/

Both sides used it superbly in the Pak-NZ series. Pretty stellar stuff, it was pretty shocking at how long it took SA to refer this decision considering that England have SFA remaining and it was the plummest looking delivery of all time, hawk eye showed it to be hitting middle of middle ffs. Don't know what the umpire was thinking, it was even close to pitching outside leg, was very comfortably in.

Maybe a Broad fan?

 

[LegionOfBrad]

Swann's average is about to go past Bell's.

 

[zaremba]

Not if they refer all serious appeals they won't. I'm talking about never actually giving anyone out live unless they walk, and referring anything they consider even possibly out. It'd take up a bit of time, but taking up time >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> getting stuff wrong, and perhaps even more importantly, taking up time >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> creating vast inconsistencies in decision-making which is what the current system does.

I can see your logic, and like you my instincts are to make more rather than less use of technological aids.

But referring every decision would take so long that it would become very unpopular indeed. It may be that more decisions will be referred as time goes by, when (a) the idea of referrals has sunk in and (b) the decision-making process has become slicker and quicker. Until then, I think they should take small incremental steps. I would be very much in favour of an automatic check for a no-ball for every single dismissal though. Wouldn't take any time and would remove one area of inconsistency.

Basically, though, I'm not worried about the inconsistency tbh. Mainly it only arises because players are too reckless with their challenges. The current system is nicely calibrated to minimise on-field dissent and that's one of its best features. The "put up or shut up" element is important.

 

[chalky]

By his actions there looked like Smith was saying "we had them by the balls"

 

[superkingdave]

Thank f*** for Swanneh

 

[Athlai]

Always thought Anderson was actually a bit of a batsman. Definitely think he could have a Test match 50, the fact his FC record is so horrible surprises me a lot.

 

[Prince EWS]

Maybe Swann will be the one to convert.

 

[TT Boy]

South Africa in looking toothless against tail shocker.

What with the prospected weather, England should probably feel safe now.

 

[GIMH]

Both sides used it superbly in the Pak-NZ series. Pretty stellar stuff, it was pretty shocking at how long it took SA to refer this decision considering that England have SFA remaining and it was the plummest looking delivery of all time, hawk eye showed it to be hitting middle of middle ffs. Don't know what the umpire was thinking, it was even close to pitching outside leg, was very comfortably in.

Maybe a Broad fan?

Haha, moi, a Broad fan?

No seriously. He was obviously plumb from what everyone has said. What I'm saying is, the rules say no dressing room referrals. Yet Saffa seemed to use the dressing room. That's all.

 

[Prince EWS]

Haha, moi, a Broad fan?

I think he meant the umpire.

 

[Athlai]

Haha, moi, a Broad fan?

No seriously. He was obviously plumb from what everyone has said. What I'm saying is, the rules say no dressing room referrals. Yet Saffa seemed to use the dressing room. That's all.

Didn't see anyone dressing room stuff live, but wouldn't be surprised if it did happen. Pakistan did use the dressing room once as well. Would like a firmer ICC view on this matter, I reckon it should just be onfield, and really only for howlers (which this one was).