shivfan
Banned
To me, it was a perfectly legal delivery....Oh God Harper is the 3rd umpire and he's missed the no-ball!
I'm no fan of Harper, but I think he got this one right.
To me, it was a perfectly legal delivery....Oh God Harper is the 3rd umpire and he's missed the no-ball!
Think this is rather irrelevant. The thinking here is fairly obvious. Hoggard swung England to victory here 5 years ago, and England wanted another swing bowler to partner with Anderson.It's potentially the worst selection we've made in ages. Onions hasn't been great, but he has been unlucky at times and he's match fit. Sidebottom, otoh, hasn't played for ages and he was never great against decent opposition anyway. Obviously the way we're batting it's probably going to be irrelevant.
I've seen the replay again, and Morkel's foot landed with a part of the heel behind the line....Someone describe what happened on the Cook wicket to me please
There was a bit bof boot elevated but behind the line. Not much, but enough to vindicate my decision.Someone describe what happened on the Cook wicket to me please
Yeah, they were as bad when AUS toured. Daryl Cullinan was the highlight - as Phil Hughes was flaying the SA bowlers around the park, he was still ripping into him.These South African commentators are easily the most one-eyed and biased commentators I have seen in a long time. I mean this is worse than listening to Gavaskar.
Bit rich coming from an Aussie.Yeah, they were as bad when AUS toured. Daryl Cullinan was the highlight - as Phil Hughes was flaying the SA bowlers around the park, he was still ripping into him.
CW < Harper. Who'd have thunk.For the reason Shivfan pointed out, Harper was right about the no-ball.
Law 24.5.
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.
There was a quarter of an inch of boot behind the line when his foot landed. So it's not a no-ball.
The concern is that there isn't really an English equivalent of Morkel at the moment.ANyway, we're 15 overs in and if their seamers can do this damage I see no reason why ours can't. This could be a cracking match.
Broad's quite similar to Morkel IMO. I'm more concerned about the fact that South Africa's top order is stronger and less likely to get out to similar bowling.The concern is that there isn't really an English equivalent of Morkel at the moment.