10th Match - Australia v West Indies

[Spark]

It's our strength TBF, they're all tall as well. We've just spent 2 years hardly taking a wicket whilst the likes of kesrick Williams rack up the caps. The quality of our side has risen fairly sharply in the last 6 months.

The batting needs more games though. Talent to burn but not enough game awareness.

Yeah, feels like this WC may just be a year too soon for this side.

 

[GoodAreasShane]

Interesting that NCN did some work on his batting with noted Sheffield Shield triple centurion Liam Davis during the last Australian summer.

 

[Burgey]

Ballsy performance by Aus. The kind to bring a team together in an attritional environment like this. There were so many times in this match when they could've royally **** themselves, but they held it together.

Finch should have worn a lame T shirt to the toss with a #corneredtiger on it, and the game would have gone down as some sort of bizarre, brain dead legend.

 

[Burgey]

Interesting that NCN did some work on his batting with noted Sheffield Shield triple centurion Liam Davis during the last Australian summer.

Would be good if he did some work on his bowling with someone like noted Sheffield Shield prolific wicket taker Trent Copeland.

In fairness to him, injuries have robbed him of the yard of pace he used to have.

 

[h_hurricane]

The difference between Russel ending up as a great cricketer and a good cricketer is the one between a good cricketing brain and **** cricket brain.

 

[trundler]

The difference between Russel ending up as a great cricketer and a good cricketer is the one between a good cricketing brain and **** cricket brain.

So.. a lot?

If Australia had Richardson or Haze in their ranks, batting NCN 7 and ditching Stoinis would've been the right call.

 

[h_hurricane]

So.. a lot?

If Australia had Richardson or Haze in their ranks, batting NCN 7 and ditching Stoinis would've been the right call.

It is a thin margin isn't it ? A bit more discipline from him, and WI would have romped home yesterday. He did not need to lash out at each delivery. Probably needs to look at his captain on how to play in accordance with match situations.

 

[thierry henry]

Just re: the DRS overturns for Holder, have they changed the rules?

It always used to annoy me that there was a margin of error for hit in line/pitched in line, because that should be a precise spot in the middle of the ball imo. With the Maxwell-Holder review, it was overturned as ‘pitched outside’ because the centre of the ball was outside leg (correctly imo) despite part of the ball being ‘in line’.

However with the Zampa-Holder review it was ‘umpires call’ for impact, despite the centre of the ball again being outside leg. Isn’t that inconsistent?

 

[Prince EWS]

Just re: the DRS overturns for Holder, have they changed the rules?

It always used to annoy me that there was a margin of error for hit in line/pitched in line, because that should be a precise spot in the middle of the ball imo. With the Maxwell-Holder review, it was overturned as ‘pitched outside’ because the centre of the ball was outside leg (correctly imo) despite part of the ball being ‘in line’.

However with the Zampa-Holder review it was ‘umpires call’ for impact, despite the centre of the ball again being outside leg. Isn’t that inconsistent?

Yeah pitched in line and hit in are are treated differently, apparently because of technical limitations in determining exactly when a ball has struck the pad that don't exist in the same way when it bounces off the ground (I'm sceptical about the truth of this tbh, but that's how it was pitched to us plebs).

 

[Spark]

Yeah pitched in line and hit in are are treated differently, apparently because of technical limitations in determining exactly when a ball has struck the pad that don't exist in the same way when it bounces off the ground (I'm sceptical about the truth of this tbh, but that's how it was pitched to us plebs).

It's mostly because it's hard to determine because you can't really identify the precise moment where ball contacts pad, and from there the interaction between pad and ball often perturbs the trajectory of the ball. So the frame where it "looks" like it's hit the pad for the first time may be a bit misleading

 

[Spark]

Yeah pitched in line and hit in are are treated differently, apparently because of technical limitations in determining exactly when a ball has struck the pad that don't exist in the same way when it bounces off the ground (I'm sceptical about the truth of this tbh, but that's how it was pitched to us plebs).

It's mostly because it's hard to determine because you can't really identify the precise moment where ball contacts pad, and from there the interaction between pad and ball often perturbs the trajectory of the ball. So the frame where it "looks" like it's hit the pad for the first time may be a bit misleading

 

[Daemon]

It's mostly because it's hard to determine because you can't really identify the precise moment where ball contacts pad, and from there the interaction between pad and ball often perturbs the trajectory of the ball. So the frame where it "looks" like it's hit the pad for the first time may be a bit misleading

I think PEWS gets that, it's just that he thinks that it's hard to tell the exact moment when it's hit the ground for the first time as well.

Obv pads are a lot softer than the pitch though.

 

[Burgey]

Like your face and your posts tbh

 

[harsh.ag]

Even if you could precisely identify where the ball struck the pad, the prediction involved thereafter makes it a lot more error prone than the pitching bit.

 

[The Hutt Rec]

Even if they didn’t care about the umpires call aspect, these days they would need to factor in more than 10% of the ball (at least) has to hit the stumps in order to remove the zing bails.

 

[stephen]

So I watched the overs leading up to where Gayle was dismissed. Honestly in real time I can understand why Gaffney got the calls wrong. The stumps clipping sounded like a bat. The lbw looked worse than it was because of a combination of late 150kph swing and Gayle falling across his stumps.

The no ball was inexcusable but then the Windies bowlers were never called for bowling more than two bouncers an over in the first innings either, so there are swings and roundabouts. Gayle was going to get out to Starc either bowled or lbw the way he was batting anyway.

I can understand the the Windies fans are furious though. When things don't go your way and it feels like the umpires are picking on you it can lead to resentment. It's why all umpires should be picked on all the other things they do and not their decision making, which is only a small part of their job.

 

[Daemon]

Can someone explain why they weren't going for it in the 49th over?

 

[TheJediBrah]

All I wanted was to laugh at the Aussies at the WC and it is looking as if #6 is on the way

Lol they've won 2 games against 2 minnows

(being a bit harsh on WI but let's be honest you wouldn't have backed either Afg or WI as top 4 teams)

It's why all umpires should be picked on all the other things they do and not their decision making, which is only a small part of their job.

I feel like like the decision making is the main part of their job

 

[Burgey]

So I watched the overs leading up to where Gayle was dismissed. Honestly in real time I can understand why Gaffney got the calls wrong. The stumps clipping sounded like a bat. The lbw looked worse than it was because of a combination of late 150kph swing and Gayle falling across his stumps.

The no ball was inexcusable but then the Windies bowlers were never called for bowling more than two bouncers an over in the first innings either, so there are swings and roundabouts. Gayle was going to get out to Starc either bowled or lbw the way he was batting anyway.

I can understand the the Windies fans are furious though. When things don't go your way and it feels like the umpires are picking on you it can lead to resentment. It's why all umpires should be picked on all the other things they do and not their decision making, which is only a small part of their job.

The single funniest thing in this WC so far is Chris Gayle overturning a caught behind review (which bowled him but the bails didn't come off) in the same over he overturned an lbw decision and nicked a ball a centimetre over the keeper's head for four, only to get out lbw two overs later, review it unsuccessfully then walk off shaking his head as though he had no luck.

 

[Daemon]

Lol they've won 2 games against 2 minnows

(being a bit harsh on WI but let's be honest you wouldn't have backed either Afg or WI as top 4 teams)


I feel like like the decision making is the main part of their job

Yeah it also took some really bad cricket from WI and bowling that you wouldn't expect Starc to always replicate to get them back in and they still just barely scraped over the line.

Not convinced by them, but then again none of the other teams are looking particularly dominant either.