***Official*** England in India 2016/17

[centurymaker]

that is a completely different point to your previous 2 or 3 posts. I'm not going to argue with any of that. But the simple question of "did the umpire's bad decisions have a significant impact on that game of cricket?" can only be answered with a yes.

Obviously we just move on and hope for better umpiring in the next game, but all I was stating was any justification that it didn't impact the match because Root was batting crap is just downright silly.

Players don't have a problem with all the luck factor in the game, but they shouldn't come out bashing the umpire when he leads to some bad luck.

Last ball of the 19th over, Butler had mis-hit his shot, it had hit bottom of his bat and he was reaching for it, but luckily for him instead of being caught at long on, it somehow flew for a six marginally evading Kohli at the boundary who got a hand to it.

Root sky'd the ball twice in the last overs, but it narrowly evaded the fielders both times, it was quite some luck. But when an outsider (umpire) instinctively unintentionally affects the luck factor, objections are raised.. (Root was given out wrongly, it was simply just bad luck,). Luck is constantly playing a factor and all players accept it, but have a huge problem with the luck factor via an umpire. Sometimes the dew bails you out, sometimes the ball bounces unevenly, sometimes the ball moves off the wicket.. sometimes there are plays and misses instead of a wicket. Too many variations. Too many factors. Luck is always there, both good & bad luck.

And the umpire is part of the luck package, just like in football or rugby when the ref makes spontaneous decisions. It's all part of the thrill and excitement. We unfortunately get too nitty picky over a single event.

And I don't think Root decision changed the outcome of the match, partly because of how well Bumrah was bowling on that pitch to all the batsmen towards the end. And partly because of deeper reasons which I won't go into because those reasons are beyond the awareness of majority of 'people'.

 

[centurymaker]

But yes the decision had some impact on the game.

 

[Daemon]

Players don't have a problem with all the luck factor in the game, but they shouldn't come out bashing the umpire when he leads to some bad luck.

Last ball of the 19th over, Butler had mis-hit his shot, it had hit bottom of his bat and he was reaching for it, but luckily for him instead of being caught at long on, it somehow flew for a six marginally evading Kohli at the boundary who got a hand to it.

Root sky'd the ball twice in the last overs, but it narrowly evaded the fielders both times, it was quite some luck. But when an outsider (umpire) instinctively unintentionally affects the luck factor, objections are raised.. (Root was given out wrongly, it was simply just bad luck,). Luck is constantly playing a factor and all players accept it, but have a huge problem with the luck factor via an umpire. Sometimes the dew bails you out, sometimes the ball bounces unevenly, sometimes the ball moves off the wicket.. sometimes there are plays and misses instead of a wicket. Too many variations. Too many factors. Luck is always there, both good & bad luck.

And the umpire is part of the luck package, just like in football or rugby when the ref makes spontaneous decisions. It's all part of the thrill and excitement. We unfortunately get too nitty picky over a single event.

And I don't think Root decision changed the outcome of the match, partly because of how well Bumrah was bowling on that pitch to all the batsmen towards the end. And partly because of deeper reasons which I won't go into because those reasons are beyond the awareness of majority of 'people'.

I can't accept this. It would mean I'd have to stop crying about Sydney 08.

 

[honestbharani]

stop defending bad umpiring decisions. 91Jmay's reaction was over the top straight after the match (though I can understand why, sometimes as a fan we get carried away immediately after the fact) but these posts are just silly now. The Root wicket was big, anyone watching knows that. Should England have won despite the wicket? Yes. But it still had a major impact.

Yep.. Buttler might not have swung so hard if it was just 7 off 5. It was a huge decision and it helped India win. Is not the only reason but we were lucky and England fans have reason to feel bitter about it. I do wish they atleast bring in DRS for T20Is. That would have certainly helped last Sunday.

 

[srbhkshk]

lol, without Root's dismissal we have Buttler on strike needing 7 off 5 rather than 6 off 3. Not to mention Kohli being given an extra 20 runs quickly + taking pressure off Rahul early.

Well yeah, I'm not saying that those 2 decisions didn't hurt England which is why I used the terms "not game breaking" and "not a huge blow" I'm just trying to say that :
1. The decisions lowered England's chances to win, but not drastically in any way.
2. Yuvraj's decision hurt India rather than England.
3. This is my main point, accusing umpires of being **** is fine, accusing them of being biased towards India is not cool.

Also, I don't think neutral umpires are gonna be a thing in T20s, the format is used to groom umpires (like players) for more crickety - cricket, I can certainly see 1 DRS chance per innings for the teams but even that might hurt the quick nature of the game.

 

[Adders]

And partly because of deeper reasons which I won't go into because those reasons are beyond the awareness of majority of 'people'.

 

[indiaholic]

/r/iamverysmart material right there.

 

[ImpatientLime]

Players don't have a problem with all the luck factor in the game, but they shouldn't come out bashing the umpire when he leads to some bad luck.

Last ball of the 19th over, Butler had mis-hit his shot, it had hit bottom of his bat and he was reaching for it, but luckily for him instead of being caught at long on, it somehow flew for a six marginally evading Kohli at the boundary who got a hand to it.

Root sky'd the ball twice in the last overs, but it narrowly evaded the fielders both times, it was quite some luck. But when an outsider (umpire) instinctively unintentionally affects the luck factor, objections are raised.. (Root was given out wrongly, it was simply just bad luck,). Luck is constantly playing a factor and all players accept it, but have a huge problem with the luck factor via an umpire. Sometimes the dew bails you out, sometimes the ball bounces unevenly, sometimes the ball moves off the wicket.. sometimes there are plays and misses instead of a wicket. Too many variations. Too many factors. Luck is always there, both good & bad luck.

And the umpire is part of the luck package, just like in football or rugby when the ref makes spontaneous decisions. It's all part of the thrill and excitement. We unfortunately get too nitty picky over a single event.

And I don't think Root decision changed the outcome of the match, partly because of how well Bumrah was bowling on that pitch to all the batsmen towards the end. And partly because of deeper reasons which I won't go into because those reasons are beyond the awareness of majority of 'people'.

there's a world of difference between luck and incompetence.

never mind he hit the cover off it. it wasn't even tracking to hit the stumps.

 

[91Jmay]

Well yeah, I'm not saying that those 2 decisions didn't hurt England which is why I used the terms "not game breaking" and "not a huge blow" I'm just trying to say that :
1. The decisions lowered England's chances to win, but not drastically in any way.
2. Yuvraj's decision hurt India rather than England.
3. This is my main point, accusing umpires of being **** is fine, accusing them of being biased towards India is not cool.

Also, I don't think neutral umpires are gonna be a thing in T20s, the format is used to groom umpires (like players) for more crickety - cricket, I can certainly see 1 DRS chance per innings for the teams but even that might hurt the quick nature of the game.

They probably aren't deliberately bias, but it is ridiculous to pretend subconscious pressure does not impact people. As I've mentioned, if umpires are totally immune to this then they absolutely should stand in Tests and World Cup finals for their own nation as well.

 

[honestbharani]

Your argument is surely understandable, Jmay, but I think the quicker fix would be to just introduce DRS for T20s and then bring in neutral umpires as well. I think each format is as important as the other at the international level and should be treated with that respect. The main reason you see T20Is without DRS and neutral umpires is because the admins still dont think people care about it, unless is the World T20. As others have pointed out, when you got specialist T20 players going around right now, such incompetence can impact careers and lives. Needs to be taken with the seriousness any international cricket deserves, IMO.

 

[centurymaker]

/r/iamverysmart material right there.

noo. It has nothing to do with being smart. It's to do with awareness. (Hardly anyone is exposed to such stuff).

 

[indiaholic]

Feel free to expose here..

 

[centurymaker]

there's a world of difference between luck and incompetence.

never mind he hit the cover off it. it wasn't even tracking to hit the stumps.

That's a bit debatable.
bad luck that the umpire didn't see the edge. On another day, he may have seen it, despite the incompetence.

 

[Shri]

Feel free to expose here..

Family forum.

 

[centurymaker]

Feel free to expose here..

Everyone here is from different backgrounds, different countries, and so have different conceptions of reality. But the reality is beyond all conceptions and (ofcourse all the perceptions too). And that underlying reality is of oneness of all there is. There is no you or me. It's a mind-made illusion.

Analogy-
Computer has hardware and software, but the computer-the hardware nor the software can operare without electricity. The electricity powers the computer, without it the computer is useless.

Similarly, a human is made up of body, mind and life-force. Body is like hardware, mind is like software, while the true being (the life-force) is like the electricity that powers the whole human instrumentation to function. The life-force is not dependent on anything, but without it, there is no human or anything. Its the essence of all.

All electricity is one and the same. The same electricity is used to power computer as is used to light bulbs etc, similarly the life-force is the essence of all in this physical universe.

Because there is oneness, there is only one being/ one power, one force. So naturally all that happens is the play or the illusion of that 'one'.

When we see a wave in the ocean, we see it
as distinct from the ocean, but the wave is a temporary ripple in the ocean of water. Similarly all physical forms are ever-changing temporary ripples in the ocean of oneness of life-force (it can be called anything, a name is a mere label to define it, but actually cannot be defined, it is the essence of all and can only be realised if we can transcend the mind. But we are completely caught up in mind- constant thoughts, constant mental-activity, and thus we come to "think" that we are our mind and body because we are so deeply identified with them, but we are beyond mind & body)

The ego which is in the mind gives us a false sense of individuality. Me.... I....
Its a strong ripple in the mind, giving us a feeling of apparent individuality.

Transcend all and you realise who you actually are, the infinite one. And so things happen as they are meant to happen. 'I' don't want to go any deeper than this. It's already a bit much for an introduction.

 

[indiaholic]

Didn't know Eckhart Tolle was a cricket fan.

 

[centurymaker]

 

[Shri]

Everyone here is from different backgrounds, different countries, and so have different conceptions of reality. But the reality is beyond all conceptions and (ofcourse all the perceptions too). And that underlying reality is of oneness of all there is. There is no you or me. It's a mind-made illusion.

Analogy-
Computer has hardware and software, but the computer-the hardware nor the software can operare without electricity. The electricity powers the computer, without it the computer is useless.

Similarly, a human is made up of body, mind and life-force. Body is like hardware, mind is like software, while the true being (the life-force) is like the electricity that powers the whole human instrumentation to function. The life-force is not dependent on anything, but without it, there is no human or anything. Its the essence of all.

All electricity is one and the same. The same electricity is used to power computer as is used to light bulbs etc, similarly the life-force is the essence of all in this physical universe.

Because there is oneness, there is only one being/ one power, one force. So naturally all that happens is the play or the illusion of that 'one'.

When we see a wave in the ocean, we see it
as distinct from the ocean, but the wave is a temporary ripple in the ocean of water. Similarly all physical forms are ever-changing temporary ripples in the ocean of oneness of life-force (it can be called anything, a name is a mere label to define it, but actually cannot be defined, it is the essence of all and can only be realised if we can transcend the mind. But we are completely caught up in mind- constant thoughts, constant mental-activity, and thus we come to "think" that we are our mind and body because we are so deeply identified with them, but we are beyond mind & body)

The ego which is in the mind gives us a false sense of individuality. Me.... I....
Its a strong ripple in the mind, giving us a feeling of apparent individuality.

Transcend all and you realise who you actually are, the infinite one. And so things happen as they are meant to happen. 'I' don't want to go any deeper than this. It's already a bit much for an introduction.

What are your thoughts on homeopathy?

 

[weldone]

Everyone here is from different backgrounds, different countries, and so have different conceptions of reality. But the reality is beyond all conceptions and (ofcourse all the perceptions too). And that underlying reality is of oneness of all there is. There is no you or me. It's a mind-made illusion.

Analogy-
Computer has hardware and software, but the computer-the hardware nor the software can operare without electricity. The electricity powers the computer, without it the computer is useless.

Similarly, a human is made up of body, mind and life-force. Body is like hardware, mind is like software, while the true being (the life-force) is like the electricity that powers the whole human instrumentation to function. The life-force is not dependent on anything, but without it, there is no human or anything. Its the essence of all.

All electricity is one and the same. The same electricity is used to power computer as is used to light bulbs etc, similarly the life-force is the essence of all in this physical universe.

Because there is oneness, there is only one being/ one power, one force. So naturally all that happens is the play or the illusion of that 'one'.

When we see a wave in the ocean, we see it
as distinct from the ocean, but the wave is a temporary ripple in the ocean of water. Similarly all physical forms are ever-changing temporary ripples in the ocean of oneness of life-force (it can be called anything, a name is a mere label to define it, but actually cannot be defined, it is the essence of all and can only be realised if we can transcend the mind. But we are completely caught up in mind- constant thoughts, constant mental-activity, and thus we come to "think" that we are our mind and body because we are so deeply identified with them, but we are beyond mind & body)

The ego which is in the mind gives us a false sense of individuality. Me.... I....
Its a strong ripple in the mind, giving us a feeling of apparent individuality.

Transcend all and you realise who you actually are, the infinite one. And so things happen as they are meant to happen. 'I' don't want to go any deeper than this. It's already a bit much for an introduction.

Who is your spiritual guru these days?

 

[vcs]

Didn't know Deepak Chopra posted on CW.