***Official*** Australia in India 2017

[stephen]

AWTA.

Storm in a teacup. The real news is the captain of another side publicly asserting that the other side are systematic cheats. Even if the method of cheating would give no more than a fractional advantage.

 

[honestbharani]

@Spark: Lol.. its the fuzzy part for me coz I do not see why BCCI and others would go for an appeal if it was not the case. But if it is without concrete evidence, like you say, then I do not expect any appeal from anyone. CA called it "outrageous", BCCI called Kohli "exemplrary in behaviour". ICC said "we cant afford you two to fight at this point, so just play nice". I am moving more and more towards Kohli was just shooting from the lip with no evidence side now.

 

[stephen]

The thing is that if the BCCI do appeal and Smith is found not guilty, they're opening Kohli up for a much bigger charge. They would be insane to appeal. Waste of time and money.

There should have been a small fine for Kohli's unfounded public accusations for bringing the game into disrepute but it should have been a slap on the wrist and nothing more.

 

[Spark]

@Spark: Lol.. its the fuzzy part for me coz I do not see why BCCI and others would go for an appeal if it was not the case. But if it is without concrete evidence, like you say, then I do not expect any appeal from anyone. CA called it "outrageous", BCCI called Kohli "exemplrary in behaviour". ICC said "we cant afford you two to fight at this point, so just play nice". I am moving more and more towards Kohli was just shooting from the lip with no evidence side now.

Yeah. There's plenty of room between "he is absolutely 100% correct" and "he's just lying". Enough room to say that this is a waste of everyone's time when we could worry about actual cricket instead.

 

[Burgey]

@Spark: Lol.. its the fuzzy part for me coz I do not see why BCCI and others would go for an appeal if it was not the case. But if it is without concrete evidence, like you say, then I do not expect any appeal from anyone. CA called it "outrageous", BCCI called Kohli "exemplrary in behaviour". ICC said "we cant afford you two to fight at this point, so just play nice". I am moving more and more towards Kohli was just shooting from the lip with no evidence side now.

The BCCI has a great record in appealing what should be hopeless cases involving controversies with Australia. It was interesting the BCCI didn't address Kohli's claims of the opposition systemically cheating in their statement.

 

[honestbharani]

And winning said cases.

 

[Burgey]

Yeah. There's plenty of room between "he is absolutely 100% correct" and "he's just lying". Enough room to say that this is a waste of everyone's time when we could worry about actual cricket instead.

Nah, **** that. Drag it out. Fills in the space between now and next Thursday, and it'll be more entertaining than any of the cricket actually being played around the world atm.

 

[Burgey]

And winning said cases.

Yeah, that's what I just said....

Like if you have a great record in appealing things it means, you now, you get up on your appeals.

 

[Midwinter]

They have a third umpire, a TV umpire and a match referee what are these blokes doing ?

If they want someone to travel the world, watching cricket, to see if people are looking at the dressing room after an appeal, I'll do it for a small fee plus expenses..

 

[honestbharani]

I am enjoying both the other test matches going on ATM, actually. BD are competing well so far and NZ are still on even terms, or I would actually say ahead. Its awesome.

 

[social]

It's seems fairly evident that Kohli was talking **** if this is anything to go by

"I saw that two times happening when I was batting out there," Kohli said post-match. "I pointed it out to the umpires, that it's happened twice and I have seen their players looking up there for confirmation and that's why the umpire was at him (Smith). "Because we observed that and we told the match referee as well, and we told the umpires they had been doing that for the last three days and that had to stop."

Kohli declined to elaborate on those two instances that he witnessed first-hand when quizzed by an Indian journalist at his post-match media conference. And examination of ball-by-ball commentary during the combined 59 minutes that Kohli spent at the crease during the second Test (for a match tally of 27 runs) shows only twice did Australia appeal for a wicket, and didn't convene to consider a review on either occasion. One of those was a half-shout for a catch when Kohli played back to Lyon and the ball lobbed to short leg via his thigh pad, the other came in the second innings when Steve O'Keefe appealed for an lbw against Kohli that was declined and to which the Australians showed no urgency to review. The only two genuine DRS moments during Kohli's time in the middle as a batter were the pair of unsuccessful reviews the India captain called for upon being given out lbw in both knocks.

Virat's claim against our grain: Lehmann | cricket.com.au

I would have no problems penalizing both Smith and Kohli but the problem is that a financial penalty would be largely irrelevant to a multi-millionaire so that leaves suspension as the only option and I cant believe that anyone would want to see that

Just move on

 

[Burgey]

They have a third umpire, a TV umpire and a match referee what are these blokes doing ?

If they want someone to travel the world, watching cricket, to see if people are looking at the dressing room after an appeal, I'll do it for a small fee plus expenses..

Yeah but imagine if that meant you had to sit through Bangladesh v Sri Lanka or Zimbabwe v WI. Sure the countries themselves are beautiful, but the cricket would be a dirge.

 

[Malleeboy]

How about penalty runs for offenses? 50 runs per offence. Money don't hurt, suspension doesn't always hurt but penalty runs would make the whole team peeved at the action.

 

[Arachnodouche]

Anything resembling an undercut automatically makes you look and behave like a douchebag.

 

[Spikey]

Gerard Whateley‏ @GerardWhateley 8m8 minutes ago
Trevor Hohns on Stoinis selection
"We considered the stronger bowler to be the best option at this stage"



IHSDiugsfyi;hsifgbuiaagfiywgfbou;f u

 

[Prince EWS]

Gerard Whateley‏ @GerardWhateley 8m8 minutes ago
Trevor Hohns on Stoinis selection
"We considered the stronger bowler to be the best option at this stage"



IHSDiugsfyi;hsifgbuiaagfiywgfbou;f u

Even ignoring the fact that Marsh only bowled five overs in two Tests, I don't even think Stoinis actually is the stronger bowler.

 

[Midwinter]

The career numbers

Wickets
Stoinis 32@48
Henriques 101@32

Perhaps he should have said Stoinis is a long term prospect that we want to have around the setup.
(like Swepson and Agar)
Because on his record and on form the selectors are making themselves look foolish.

 

[Prince EWS]

The career numbers

Wickets
Stoinis 32@48
Henriques 101@32

Perhaps he should have said Stoinis is a long term prospect that we want to have around the setup.
(like Swepson and Agar)
Because on his record and on form the selectors are making themselves look foolish.

To be fair I do think this straight comparison flatters Henriques's bowling at the moment. He's done at lot less bowling lately (3w @ 50+ this season I think) and I think that's partly what has helped his batting evolve a bit. I do think I'd still rate him as a better bowler than Stoinis, but not by the margin that's indicating.

 

[honestbharani]

Even ignoring the fact that Marsh only bowled five overs in two Tests, I don't even think Stoinis actually is the stronger bowler.

You mean he is not, not even physically??

 

[honestbharani]

https://sports.ndtv.com/india-vs-au...ia-caught-australias-illegal-drs-ploy-1667759



FWIW..