***Official*** 2nd Test at Adelaide

[morgieb]

I dont get why that is outside leg, some part of the ball still was inside the line?

Has to be more than 50% IIRC.

 

[adub]

Seriously, this is tough.

 

[Spark]

how the blazes do you play that

 

[Spark]

booo, why go back around the wicket

 

[Gnske]

booo, why go back around the wicket

You get one LBW overturned I guess

 

[DriveClub]

The middle of the ball i.e. the part of the ball that actually hits the ground has to be in line.

Since some part of the ball pitched inside the line shouldn't that be umpire's call?

 

[Spark]

Since some part of the ball pitched inside the line shouldn't that be umpire's call?

There's no umpire's call on something which is completely 100% definitive i.e. where the ball hit the ground

 

[adub]

**** the fidgets are turned up to 12

 

[Starfighter]

I think Smith is posing now.

 

[Spark]

Smith

 

[morgieb]

There's no umpire's call on something which is completely 100% definitive i.e. where the ball hit the ground

If where the ball hit the ground is 100% definitive, then why isn't "where it hit him on the pad"?

 

[NUFAN]

Handscomb loves a good 3 to start off his innings, seems to happen quite often.

 

[quincywagstaff]

Wow, Handscombe managed to score runs in front of the wicket, a Christmas miracle!

 

[GotSpin]

Impressive spell from Anderson. Handsie a chance to nick off still

 

[Spark]

If where the ball hit the ground is 100% definitive, then why isn't "where it hit him on the pad"?

Because that isn't definitive, because a human has to basically guess where the impact is which is actually quite hard to do precisely, due to the fact that a very hard, fast object (a cricket ball) impacting a soft, angular object (a pad) is not even remotely elastic and therefore quite hard to pin down. The interaction between ball and pad will almost certainly change the ball's trajectory in completely unexpected ways even as the ball is "sinking in" to the pad, and therefore the point of impact is never quite certain.

Whereas, well, you can sort of see where it hit the ground.

 

[Starfighter]

Because that isn't definitive, because a human has to basically guess where the impact is which is actually quite hard to do precisely, due to the fact that a very hard, fast object (a cricket ball) impacting a soft, angular object (a pad) is not even remotely elastic and therefore quite hard to pin down. The interaction between ball and pad will almost certainly change the ball's trajectory in completely unexpected ways even as the ball is "sinking in" to the pad, and therefore the point of impact is never quite certain.

Whereas, well, you can sort of see where it hit the ground.

Static you mean? The pad is quite elastic. That fact that it's usually moving doesn't help.

 

[TNT]

If where the ball hit the ground is 100% definitive, then why isn't "where it hit him on the pad"?

Its not 100% definitive where the ball will hit the stumps after hitting the pads.

 

[Spark]

Static you mean? The pad is quite elastic.

Elastic in the sense of an elastic collision. Think two billard balls colliding (that would be elastic) as opposed to, say, two grandfather clocks (very, very non-elastic). One process is very easy to predict, one is not.

 

[Starfighter]

I haven't physics'd since high school so I wouldn't remember.


I was thinking is a deformational sense.





Inside edge?

 

[DriveClub]

Too high again imo