-
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*** Pakistan in New Zealand 2016/17
- Thread starter Niall
- Start date
Blocky
Banned
I'd say bat handle creaked, the ball had gone past the main meat of the bat before the spike occured, and it looked to be daylight, plus the rotation of the ball and path it was on did not change at all.
Just more evidence that Snicko is the only thing they really pay attention to.
Blocky
Banned
I think 280 is par here, 350 would put us firmly ahead.
This pitch although not playing massive tricks, if Henry can't perform in these conditions then he's not going to perform anywhere - it's got good lift, seam movement until the ball is older and looking at the forecast, overhead conditions will become better for the bowlers tomorrow too.
This pitch although not playing massive tricks, if Henry can't perform in these conditions then he's not going to perform anywhere - it's got good lift, seam movement until the ball is older and looking at the forecast, overhead conditions will become better for the bowlers tomorrow too.
wellAlbidarned
International Coach
@Blocky regarding the Williamson dismissal - I could probably swallow it if gould clearly stated that his rationale for overturning was the deviation from front on, but he made the decision after watching loads of side-on snicko and hotspot replays with no comments so it's not really clear what his evidence was. The entire point of having the third umpire voice on the telly is (right or wrong) to make the decision process transparent, which it was not.
Last edited:
Blocky
Banned
I think it comes back to what I said above, they're placing snicko above everything else and if there is any blemish on snicko when the ball is in the vicinity of the bat, that's enough for them. If you look at his process with the De Grandhomme reviews, the first one had clear daylight betwene bat and ball due to it being a straight bat shot and even though there was a sound readout, you could see that it was obviously not the ball hitting the bat. The second one was a horizontal bat shot which obscures the ability to see bat and ball (due to depth perception) but there was a spike on Snicko around about the proximity of the bat..
If he'd looked at all evidence, you'd see the rotation of the seam stayed consistent, the ball didn't deviate once passing the bat, the ball had passed the flesh of the bat before the sound registered and the register was a much thicker sound than what a normal edge would make.
So I get what you're saying - the dismissal with Williamson, he reached the right decision on the wrong conclusions because he didn't review all of the evidence available, but all of the evidence available actually helped his decision in that case, versus the DeG one.
wellAlbidarned
International Coach
not sure if all this prodding around is a good thing strategically - we don't want our yolobros Southee and Henry coming out against the new ball. Time to get a move on.
Zinzan
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Henry's scheduled at come in at 11, if that's true, he'll be our best 11 in donkey's years.
Blocky
Banned
The cleanest hitter with the best eye, but Wagner is a much better batsman than either of them technically, he hasn't got the eye that Henry or Southee has though.
Zinzan
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Probably better than Wagner tbf, not that he'd last any longer than Wags. Southee will typically score you 17 off 19 balls, vs. Wagner's 12 off 30. The latter is more useful if you want a supporting role.
