*Official* Fifth Test at the SCG

[Burgey]

It's hard to say. No doubt for mine that Clarke is setting his own fields mostly, just by some of their characteristics (they change quickly, and in certain circumstances some truly outlandish fields are employed. That field to Anderson last over yesterday...)

I wouldn't be at all shocked to learn that Haddin was in Clarke's ear a fair bit.

---

Anyway given what I've seen and given the situation I'd take Clarke's fieldsetting over Ponting's, Dhoni's, Strauss's, Smith's etc. etc. etc.

Haddin is VC and keeper though. Would be weird were he not to have a lot of input.

 

[Furball]

Bell's review reveals a problem with UDRS IMO.

If he'd initially been given not out, there would have been no issue. I accept that he got a tickle on it, but given the technology available to the umpires, there was nothing to support Dar's decision at all, and as far as I'm concerned shouldn't have been given out.

 

[Jono]

Not a problem with the UDRS if followed properly. But Dar implemented it incorrectly.

 

[Furball]

On a lighter note, Nasser presented post match wearing a pink suit after being voted for by Sky's viewers. Gower and Bumble wore sunglasses sitting next to him.

 

[Furball]

Not a problem with the UDRS if followed properly. But Dar implemented it incorrectly.

Look at the Pietersen incident at Melbourne. Slip cordon goes up, umpire gives nothing, it's referred. Either hotspot shows an obvious edge, in which case you overturn the decision, or as happened, hotspot shows nothing so the decision stays.

How is Bell meant to prove he hadn't hit it? I accept that hotspot is flawed, and that Dar's initial decision was correct, but given that the technology available did not conclusively show that Bell hit it, I don't believe the original decision should have stood. If snicko showed nothing but Dar had stuck with his decision, then that would reveal a massive flaw, as it would be next to impossible for batsmen to overturn incorrect caught behind calls.

 

[Spark]

If it had been a case of, say, the bad flicking the pad or ball flicking pad being the source of the noise, then that would constitute "clear evidence" for mine

But there was a clear noise at the right time (and with a bit of commonsense Hill would've heard it) and the bat was miles from the pad and the ball could only have hit the bat if anything.

Saying "snicko showed nothing but Dar had stuck with his decision, then that would reveal a massive flaw" is in itself highly flawed as in that case there would have been no noise and hence not out.

 

[Furball]

Fair enough, I'm only going by what I've seen on SSN this morning as I fell asleep at the lunch break. Sky have shown the hotspot and snicko, but haven't shown the replay of the ball going past the bat with a noise.

 

[Spark]

Was one of the first replays shown on C9 after the not out call. As soon as I saw that (or rather heard that), blatantly out for mine. Huge nick.

 

[Swash]

Not a problem with the UDRS if followed properly. But Dar implemented it incorrectly.

I dont see an issue with Dar's decision. If anything, he outdid himself.

If he had given Bell out, disregarding the fact that Hotspot didn't show anything (snicko is irrelevant, it was not available at the time of the decision), then at a stroke he would have made Punter's whinging at the last test credible.

Dar would have been BURIED if he had given Bell out with no hotspot, while KP escaped for precisely that same reason. (again nevermind snicko, it shows up about a year too late)

Admirable presence of mind by Dar IMO, he was well aware of the circumstances and consequences of going against Hotspot, and very wisely decided against stirring the pot.

The man's brilliant.

 

[Furball]

Don't think you can call it a huge nick given that it barely registered on snicko.

Should probably disregard what I've said this morning, I completely forgot that umpires had the "replay with sound" option. If all they had was hotspot, overturning it would have been fair enough, although I do think the lack of conclusive evidence from hotspot adds an element of doubt.

 

[benchmark00]

Hotspot is so **** that it couldn't even pick up Jono's sister at a blue light disco.

 

[Spark]

Don't think you can call it a huge nick given that it barely registered on snicko.

Should probably disregard what I've said this morning, I completely forgot that umpires had the "replay with sound" option. If all they had was hotspot, overturning it would have been fair enough, although I do think the lack of conclusive evidence from hotspot adds an element of doubt.

It was very loud IMO. I was stunned to hear just how loud it was, I was expecting something very faint, but instead there was this rather loud nick.

Yeah I've been talking about the "replay with sound" option all along.

 

[Spark]

I dont see an issue with Dar's decision. If anything, he outdid himself.

If he had given Bell out, disregarding the fact that Hotspot didn't show anything (snicko is irrelevant, it was not available at the time of the decision), then at a stroke he would have made Punter's whinging at the last test credible.

Dar would have been BURIED if he had given Bell out with no hotspot, while KP escaped for precisely that same reason. (again nevermind snicko, it shows up about a year too late)

Admirable presence of mind by Dar IMO, he was well aware of the circumstances and consequences of going against Hotspot, and very wisely decided against stirring the pot.

The man's brilliant.

**** some people are one-eyed. "It's all about Ponting! It's all about Ponting!"

 

[Ausage]

My thoughts on the incident were that it was out - just out. However, with the playing conditions and match situation as it was, it would have immensely unprofessional of Bell to do anything other than review it - and it's not his fault the technology's not capable of giving fully correct feedback.

He's no more of a cheat than any of the hundreds of batsmen who have stood still having nicked behind. It's not unlike the Suarez handball in the World Cup in some ways - utter gamesmanship, but I'd do it in his position without blinking. Even if I knew I'd feathered it.

Should point out that for all my bluster about the issue, I pretty much agree with all this.

 

[Swash]

**** some people are one-eyed. "It's all about Ponting! It's all about Ponting!"

When you've got a bastard down, its important to keep him there.

 

[Nate]

Hotspot is so **** that it couldn't even pick up Jono's sister at a blue light disco.

 

[Nate]

Sick of bringing him up, but I reckon Steve Smith has actually gotten worse as a cricketer in the last few months. Last season he looked so much more self-assured. His bowling today was nowhere near his best, his high action was completely gone. Hopefully he can display some of what he's capable of in the next two days.

 

[Spark]

Dropping the catch may have something to do with it.

He'll come back IMO. He's currently being ****ed around by CA, six months ago he's a specialist spinner, last week he's a #6, now under Clarke he's a #7 (where he should've been all along for mine). But once everyone gets their heads screwed back on he'll come back.

 

[Jono]

Don't have a sister ftr.

 

[Furball]

Dropping the catch may have something to do with it.

He'll come back IMO. He's currently being ****ed around by CA, six months ago he's a specialist spinner, last week he's a #6, now under Clarke he's a #7 (where he should've been all along for mine). But once everyone gets their heads screwed back on he'll come back.

He's batted 4 or 5 for NSW most of the season hasn't he?

It's a shame that there's a long ODI series and a World Cup immediately after the series. Reckon Smith would benefit from going back to Shield cricket and having season in England.