3rd Test at Headingley, Leeds

[Lillian Thomson]

Well of course they do, but there is no way it pitched outside, or did anything but hit him in line. And it was hitting leg stump at worst. I don't understand why you simply don't acknowledge it was a **** house decision. If he's guessing he shouldn't be there.

Edit: in other news, when does Anderson's County hit out start? Is it over the weekend or in the next day or two?

With the angle and no way to judge any deviation he’d be guessing, which he’s not there to do.

Anderson has played a second XI game and has a friendly County game starting tomorrow.

 

[flibbertyjibber]

No one needs to be more like PEWS

Yeah nobody should be checking out jailbait.

 

[Arachnodouche]

Watching it in real time again, you can sort of understand why Wilson gave the benefit of the doubt to Stokes. Ball appears speared down leg + there is a flurry of motion as Stoke goes down to sweep and then moves the front leg even further outside the line after missing the ball. In old days, no one would mind that decision. Not sure how DRS calculated that to be hitting either; there wasn't any sign of drastic turn for sure.

 

[PikeyB]

Exactly that . ^

Umpiring has been pretty bad throughout the series though . That high pressure atmosphere is clouding judgement . Mind you , even Hawkeye seemed like it was having an off day this Test .

 

[silentstriker]

More reviews are a bad idea. The game doesn’t need more things slowing it down - there would be a review every over. It was designed to overturn obvious bad calls (eg you know you didn’t hit it and were given out caught) - if you decide to use it for a purpose it wasn’t designed for, and then it comes to bite you in the ass - thats on you. It’s just bad tactics, and no different to making a mistake in other areas of the game that may cause you to miss out on a wicket.

 

[Uppercut]

It’s one reason why the technology’s there right? Sometimes it should 100% be out but for whatever reason it’s hard for the umpire to tell in real time. Like the very thin edges.

 

[tanglewood]

The biggest take away for me, other than the outstanding batting from Stokes, was the amount of luck he had. That was a 1 in a 1000 innings purely in that regard. Can't really complain too much about the field placings, he could have holed out nearly a dozen times in the last partnership with mistimed slogs, and that's not even getting into the missed run outs, dropped catches, lbw etc

Surely if you can mistime a shot but still have the power and technique to clear the fielders anyway that goes to your credit as a batsman? Steve Smith is an incredible player, but if he mistimes slog sweep he's getting caught on the fence because he isn't a strong enough power hitter. Stokes is one of the best power hitters in the world, that means he has extra leeway that other players don't. He can get 80% of it and still clear the ropes. That's a huge part of the reason why he can back himself in that situation as he knows he doesn't need to middle it, if Root or Labuschange or whomever were in that situation they'd have to probably play differently because they wouldn't be able to back their technique knowing it was too risky.

Basically I don't think you can call it luck when you practice it and play for it.

 

[cnerd123]

It’s one reason why the technology’s there right? Sometimes it should 100% be out but for whatever reason it’s hard for the umpire to tell in real time. Like the very thin edges.

sure, but what SS is getting at is that players should only use DRS when they are sure that a mistake has been made by the umpire. If they waste it out of hope or desperation, then they (and by extension, the fans) lose the right to moan about getting a bad decision later on.

like he said, it's a mistake in the same way fumbling a run-out, dropping a catch, or playing a dumb shot is. All part of the game.

 

[Spikey]

sure, but what SS is getting at is that players should only use DRS when they are sure that a mistake has been made by the umpire. If they waste it out of hope or desperation, then they (and by extension, the fans) lose the right to moan about getting a bad decision later on.

So (by extension) if a team loses their reviews, a team has no right to moan even if an umpire starts intentionally making incorrect decisions

(by extension)

 

[Spark]

So (by extension) if a team loses their reviews, a team has no right to moan even if an umpire starts intentionally making incorrect decisions

(by extension)

yeah it's pretty stupid logic

 

[Spark]

also where has this "review every over" meme come from? are people genuinely claiming that there's an appeal every over?

 

[Daemon]

sure, but what SS is getting at is that players should only use DRS when they are sure that a mistake has been made by the umpire. If they waste it out of hope or desperation, then they (and by extension, the fans) lose the right to moan about getting a bad decision later on.

like he said, it's a mistake in the same way fumbling a run-out, dropping a catch, or playing a dumb shot is. All part of the game.

It’s a mistake, but different to the others you mention. Mainly because doubling up as an umpire is not a cricketing skill unless you have a very loose definition of the term.

 

[Burgey]

sure, but what SS is getting at is that players should only use DRS when they are sure that a mistake has been made by the umpire. If they waste it out of hope or desperation, then they (and by extension, the fans) lose the right to moan about getting a bad decision later on.

like he said, it's a mistake in the same way fumbling a run-out, dropping a catch, or playing a dumb shot is. All part of the game.

It’s completely different to that actually, because you’ve actually taken a wicket (or you aren’t out), the tech is there to correct an umpire being wrong, yet it cannot be used.

Also, this idea of “correcting a howler” which we always hear about - if three red lights isn’t a howler, what is? If there’s clearly no edge when the ump says you’ve nicked it isn’t a howler, what is?

The argument “if you’ve used your reviews then too bad” just excuses poor umpiring.

 

[Burgey]

also where has this "review every over" meme come from? are people genuinely claiming that there's an appeal every over?

No surprise the subcontinental fans would think that

 

[Spark]

It’s a mistake, but different to the others you mention. Mainly because doubling up as an umpire is not a cricketing skill unless you have a very loose definition of the term.

like the review of leach was still terrible because you have to work to the best of your ability to maximise your chances within the system that exists. but the argument ss and ***** are making is that this actually proves that the system is good, which is absurd. drs has been manifestly inadequate in this series because the review limit has discouraged players and captains from using the system and thus has led to ~half a dozen wrong decisions standing that should demonstrably have been overturned.

 

[Starfighter]

sure, but what SS is getting at is that players should only use DRS when they are sure that a mistake has been made by the umpire. If they waste it out of hope or desperation, then they (and by extension, the fans) lose the right to moan about getting a bad decision later on.

like he said, it's a mistake in the same way fumbling a run-out, dropping a catch, or playing a dumb shot is. All part of the game.

So if the person in the best position to make the decision makes the mistake, the other people in much worse positions should try to be 'sure' that they did? This is dumb logic. It's not the players jobs to umpire, how hard is this to understand? So if a team loses both their reviews on close decisions (say just pitching outside leg, there being no umpire's call on that) because they were as confident as possible from a less favourable position than the umpire that a mistake had been made, they shouldn't complain if the umpire misses a healthy edge. Yeah, SS and you are just making excuses for the umpire's mistakes.

Might I add, most mistakes aren't that obvious. The difference between a ball pitching entirely inside leg and just outside leg is not very much (only c.3.7 cm for a normal sized ball) and will be difficult to judge from either the keeper's (behind the batsmen) or bowler's (off line) perspective, even though one is definitely out and the other is very marginally not out. Yes that might be making a case for umpiring being difficult but it certainly doesn't provide a case against the team making the reviews, and doesn't excuse really bad decisions. We should be aiming to get decisions right, not saying 'nyah you used your review earlier so it's your fault'.

 

[OverratedSanity]

One review felt very inadequate in the WC too. Cricket doesn't suffer much from a few more interruptions unlike other sports, so it's a bit baffling that they haven't got it right yet.

 

[Arachnodouche]

sure, but what SS is getting at is that players should only use DRS when they are sure that a mistake has been made by the umpire. If they waste it out of hope or desperation, then they (and by extension, the fans) lose the right to moan about getting a bad decision later on.

like he said, it's a mistake in the same way fumbling a run-out, dropping a catch, or playing a dumb shot is. All part of the game.

Can't agree with that. A player performing below par has no effect on an umpire's career. An umpire consistently ****ing up most certainly can harm the player on the receiving end. They are different facets of the game, but only one ensures the game is played on an even keel.

 

[Uppercut]

sure, but what SS is getting at is that players should only use DRS when they are sure that a mistake has been made by the umpire. If they waste it out of hope or desperation, then they (and by extension, the fans) lose the right to moan about getting a bad decision later on.

like he said, it's a mistake in the same way fumbling a run-out, dropping a catch, or playing a dumb shot is. All part of the game.

I mean a lot of the time when **** happens in life, there’s both stuff you could’ve done differently and stuff other people could’ve done differently that would have prevented it. Kind of just a matter of what you want to focus on. Paine shouldn’t be crucified for wasting the review, they had ****ing loads of chances to win the game. But he also made a pretty big mistake and you’d hope he learns from it.

 

[Spark]

and it's clear now that reviews are *part* of the natural flow of test cricket, especially now that they show what the umpire is seeing and saying to the crowd, so that argument doesn't hold up either.