• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

***Official*** Australia in South Africa + South Africa in Australia 2016/17

Black_Warrior

Black_Warrior

Cricketer Of The Year
Hey Guys,

There's a number of threads for you people - New Zealand test selection, New Zealand doom and gloom, New Zealand First Class thread.
 
Last edited:
Blocky

Blocky

Banned
Black_Warrior said:
Hey Guys,

There's a number of thread for you people - New Zealand test selection, New Zealand doom and gloom, New Zealand First Class thread.
Click to expand...
Feel free to move my posts there if you can, I realised after the fact that this was the wrong place for the discussion.

I tend to have a few groupies that follow everywhere I go, it's unfortunate but what can you do.
 
the big bambino

the big bambino

International Captain
Blocky said:
As can an LBW call where the ball is pitching in line, striking in line and hitting the stumps.... go figure.

I don't see how a batsman can feel hard done by when they're running down the wicket, beaten in flight, hit on the pads and given out. The umpire made a decision that the ball would have gone on to hit the stumps, having hit him in line and his decision was proven correct by the DRS tracking..

People stating "Well that ball would have followed a different pathway than the one shown" are making guesses based on what their eyes tell them and somehow think that this is better than statistical inference.
Click to expand...
Being that the umpire was making a decn without the drs how does he not fit the circumstances in your last sentence.
 
Blocky

Blocky

Banned
the big bambino said:
Being that the umpire was making a decn without the drs how does he not fit the circumstances in your last sentence.
Click to expand...
Sure, let's compare the view the umpire has which happens to be completely stump to stump, close to the action, with a trained mind and years of making those decisions at all levels of cricket... to a slightly off center, aerial view that we get on the TV screen with completely partial viewers who want their side to win and make them seem like they're the same thing.
 
Blocky

Blocky

Banned
My argument is simple.

The umpire gave the petulant little bugger out. The petulant little bugger didn't believe it so used a review, the review concurred with the umpire... and you're still whinging about it a week later.
 
N

NickDB

School Boy/Girl Cricketer
Blocky said:
My argument is simple.

The umpire gave the petulant little bugger out. The petulant little bugger didn't believe it so used a review, the review concurred with the umpire... and you're still whinging about it a week later.
Click to expand...
Saffer lurker here, and mainly lurk because of week long whines about lbw decisions.
 
TheJediBrah

TheJediBrah

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Blocky said:
Sure, let's compare the view the umpire has which happens to be completely stump to stump, close to the action, with a trained mind and years of making those decisions at all levels of cricket... to a slightly off center, aerial view that we get on the TV screen with completely partial viewers who want their side to win and make them seem like they're the same thing.
Click to expand...
Blocky said:
My argument is simple.

The umpire gave the petulant little bugger out. The petulant little bugger didn't believe it so used a review, the review concurred with the umpire... and you're still whinging about it a week later.
Click to expand...
Anyone else see the irony?
 
the big bambino

the big bambino

International Captain
Blocky said:
My argument is simple.

The umpire gave the petulant little bugger out. The petulant little bugger didn't believe it so used a review, the review concurred with the umpire... and you're still whinging about it a week later.
Click to expand...
The umpire should have given the benefit to the batsman who was half way down the wicket meaning there was no way he could tell if all of pitch, bounce, angle or turn would see the ball hit the stumps. Then if the bowler was confident he should have asked for drs clarification. That it was shown to be hitting was down to dumb luck not anything to do with the umps "years of experience" or what ever voodoo you reckon the umpire has.

TheJediBrah said:
Anyone else see the irony?
Click to expand...
I did. I think thats a kind description. Unkind but fair would call it hypocrisy.

marc71178 said:
Actually, you're the one with no argument. Umpire gave it out and was proven correct yet you still say it was wrong, even when other factors are pointed out to you.
Click to expand...
Just bcos you don't understand it doesn't mean I don't have an argument.
 
Last edited:
Gnske

Gnske

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Finally just seen the BT studio, my god its like they rented an aircraft hanger and shoved as many plasma screen TVs as possible in
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top