3rd Test at the SCG, Sydney, 7 Jan - 11 Jan 2021

[OverratedSanity]

How's the forecast for tomorrow? Unless we lose half a day atleast, I dont see India saving this, way too much time left.

 

[Window]

With Smith coming good, India's finally feeling the loss if Kohli and Shami/Ishant. I don't see India coming back for the rest of the series. Was always going to be tough with key players missing/injured.

 

[Burgey]

Will have you all know I exclusively predicted an Aussie lead of approx 90 on the first dig.

 

[Son Of Coco]

They’ll need to check Pant’s elbow for concussion here. That was a ****ing nasty blow

Unfortunately for Pant, you can stack on an extra 20kgs but your elbow is still all bone.

 

[Gnske]

Yea I'm all for umpires enforcing Law 41.6 more often, but there is going to massive amount of blowback from fans/coaches/media if any umpire actually does it during a game.

Just curious on reading the law, does this apply irrespective of whether there appears to be a legitimate ploy to get the batsmen out, ie the occasional full ball in between? I can see how there's a complete disregard towards applying it at all.

 

[Spark]

For the record, I've never complained about any of their posts. Only HB's whose turned me against the Indian cricket team

not making things better dot gif

 

[NotMcKenzie]

Yea I'm all for umpires enforcing Law 41.6 more often, but there is going to massive amount of blowback from fans/coaches/media if any umpire actually does it during a game.

Or perhaps they should just bloody enforce it. Taufel was on earlier saying that when he went to warn Lee in some match or other, Steve Waugh went up and told him 'this is test cricket', etc. Why does the umpire, the man in charge of the game, listen to the opinions of somebody who was a big contributor to making the Australians reviled by the rest of the cricketing world, or the boofheaded opinions of those like him? If they actually do it enough, it will become normalised just like giving batsmen out l.b.w. on the front foot has been.

 

[OverratedSanity]

Not a great start from Bumrah so far

 

[Arachnodouche]

Bumrah has to step up here. Bowling like a stiff turd atm.

 

[NotMcKenzie]

I have the slightest suspicion that may have kept just the teensiest bit low

 

[Flem274*]

pucovski defends quite wide for an aussie

**** thats low

 

[marcus1232]

the gremlins are coming

 

[Arachnodouche]

Pucovski playing it late like KW. Think he's the better candidate for the easy ton.

 

[OverratedSanity]

Oh boy thats not a great sign for tomorrow.

 

[cnerd123]

Just curious on reading the law, does this apply irrespective of whether there appears to be a legitimate ploy to get the batsmen out, ie the occasional full ball in between? I can see how there's a complete disregard towards applying it at all.

It's completely subjective and up to the umpire's interpretation. As you suggest, umpires are probably reluctant to enforce it because it would mean taking a stance that what the fielding side is doing is not part of a legitimate strategy to take a wicket. That is a very hard stance to justify, and which is why perhaps allowing umpires to report such incidents after the game, away from the heat of the moment, would be better. Let a committee sit and review the evidence and make their call after the match is done.

Or perhaps they should just bloody enforce it. Taufel was on earlier saying that when he went to warn Lee in some match or other, Steve Waugh went up and told him 'this is test cricket', etc. Why does the umpire, the man in charge of the game, listen to the opinions of somebody who was a big contributor to making the Australians reviled by the rest of the cricketing world, or the boofheaded opinions of those like him? If they actually do it enough, it will become normalised just like giving batsmen out l.b.w. on the front foot has been.

Umpires are not that respected, in case you haven't noticed. If they enforce 41.6 the way you think they should, it would be a massive controversy, and could lead to the umpire(s) in question even losing their job. Look at the fallout from Darrell Hair enforcing 21.2. I think ATM it needs to be blatantly obvious that the bowling side was trying to hurt a batsman, and not get them out, in order to enforce 41.6. We just don't really have any examples of that in modern cricket. I do agree, however, that this bar can be lowered a bit.

 

[Burgey]

Just curious on reading the law, does this apply irrespective of whether there appears to be a legitimate ploy to get the batsmen out, ie the occasional full ball in between? I can see how there's a complete disregard towards applying it at all.

There was a notorious incident in 1981 where Doug Walters was batting with deadset ferret Jim Higgs, who was bounced out off the gloves and the umpire ruled it not out on the basis of intimidatory bowling.

I think the bowler was Martin Sneddon or some such. Which was bizarre, because Lille and Thommo then the Windies had spent half a decade bouncing every **** all the time

 

[Daemon]

Warner with the hamstring injury still moving twice as fast as Ashwin

 

[Gnske]

Or perhaps they should just bloody enforce it. Taufel was on earlier saying that when he went to warn Lee in some match or other, Steve Waugh went up and told him 'this is test cricket', etc. Why does the umpire, the man in charge of the game, listen to the opinions of somebody who was a big contributor to making the Australians reviled by the rest of the cricketing world, or the boofheaded opinions of those like him? If they actually do it enough, it will become normalised just like giving batsmen out l.b.w. on the front foot has been.

I can just see captains not being a fan of the definition of intimidating bowling under the law as soon as the trigger gets pulled. Taking the law literally, Starc could bowl his first short ball at a tail-ender and get called for intimidation immediately as opposed to when a pattern of intimidating bowling is developed. Plus a lack of proper precedent has been set on when it should be called as far as I'm aware on a practical basis in international cricket, at least in the recent past unless I've missed an incident or two.

But yeah there'd be whinging at first and calls of "I thought this was test cricket wtf". But there's no rub to watching someone like Shami have his arm smashed needlessly.

 

[Burgey]

Why does the umpire, the man in charge of the game, listen to the opinions of somebody who was a big contributor to making the Australians reviled by the rest of the cricketing world,

So the umpires should just listen to players Depending on how popular they are all over the world? So basically only Kane Williamson.

 

[Burgey]

Bumrah has to step up here. Bowling like a stiff turd atm.

He’s finding out how tough it is to back up against totals of 200 odd. It’s role reversal from two years ago.