I think it's arguable it was a huge momentum killer. Obviously Rogers would have referred his if we'd had two in hand, and the fact it happened on the stroke of lunch gave everyone time to seethe at him and forget about the job at hand.
Well okay, yeah if he didn't get out it would have been good, but everyone else got out too. I'm really talking about the review. Every commentator and 90% of this board have been going on and on about it like it defined the day when Watson is the only batsman other than Clarke that looked remotely competent and Rogers was every bit as bad with the review system, if not worse if you think he had a hand in Watson's review also. There's a lot of problems with this performance and Watson making 30 odd and then wasting a review is pretty far down the list IMO.
I'm as big a Watson fan as you are, as you may recall, but saying Rogers was worse than Watson with the review system is ridiculous given I'm sure he would've reviewed his if Watson hadn't wasted the first one.
The bad vibes cost us #cancer
How much cricket do you watch?
Seems uncalled for. I think it is a good point. Perhaps a Rogers review would have delayed the deck of cards collapse but looking at how Khawaja was batting, I don't think it definitely would have done more than that.
Shame about Ponting really, the number three slot is so crucial and you could argue that Cowan/Khawaja is the weakest batsman.
You basically broke the Godwin's Law of cricket forums, nice one.
