4th Test at the Gabba, Brisbane, 15 - 19 Jan 2021

[honestbharani]

I went back and checked and he definitely said ‘intimidatory bowling’. I wondered whether there was some sort of guideline around illegal bowling being considered inherently intimidating.

Obviously Thakur to Cummins was not particularly ‘intimidating’ but you could make the theoretical argument that the batsman is entitled to not expect anything at head height after 2 bouncers? Sort of like a beamer, the idea being the batsman isn’t expecting an illegal delivery?

The point is Aussies and especially Cummins has been doing it all series to the Indian tail and they are much worse batsmen than Cummins. I honestly do not see anything but bias in that call at this point.

 

[Daemon]

And with that, Thakur has equalled Lyon's wicket tally for the series

 

[Spark]

I went back and checked and he definitely said ‘intimidatory bowling’. I wondered whether there was some sort of guideline around illegal bowling being considered inherently intimidating.

Obviously Thakur to Cummins was not particularly ‘intimidating’ but you could make the theoretical argument that the batsman is entitled to not expect anything at head height after 2 bouncers? Sort of like a beamer, the idea being the batsman isn’t expecting an illegal delivery?

I think it's just too many bouncers in a row. But that's a really bad way to enforce that rule and it does nothing to fulfill its stated purpose

 

[honestbharani]

The B Town Lara cover drives.

 

[Starfighter]

It's a shame that Haze isn't better with the bat while maintaining the same style. It'd be like having a Stuart Broad.

 

[Spark]

The point is Aussies and especially Cummins has been doing it all series to the Indian tail and they are much worse batsmen than Cummins. I honestly do not see anything but bias in that call at this point.

I wouldn't go that far, I think they're just sticking rigidly to a silly checklist rather than actually trying to deter intimidatory bowling

 

[GoodAreasShane]

This "intimadatory bowling" rule is garbage IMO.

Nothing untoward at all about giving a bit of chin music to those who can respond in kind. However, it often really isn't a smart stragegy at all

 

[thierry henry]

The point is Aussies and especially Cummins has been doing it all series to the Indian tail and they are much worse batsmen than Cummins. I honestly do not see anything but bias in that call at this point.

You say Cummins has been doing it all series, but has Cummins bowled 3 bouncers in an over ONCE in this series (or ever in his career?)

 

[honestbharani]

You say Cummins has been doing it all series, but has Cummins bowled 3 bouncers in an over ONCE in this series (or ever in his career?)

Yes, MANY times.

 

[honestbharani]

And why does it matter if they were consecutive or not? The rule does not say anything about it being consecutive.

 

[Spark]

You say Cummins has been doing it all series, but has Cummins bowled 3 bouncers in an over ONCE in this series (or ever in his career?)

I think the rule only comes into play for bouncers above shoulder height anyway. Cummins' bouncers are more aimed slightly below that.

 

[Starfighter]

You say Cummins has been doing it all series, but has Cummins bowled 3 bouncers in an over ONCE in this series (or ever in his career?)

He once bowled four that were at least very close to Jake Ball, getting him with the last one.

 

[cnerd123]

Yes, MANY times.

Yes, he most certainly has

are you defining bouncer as above the shoulder of the batsman in his normal stance? Because a 3rd bouncer in an over would be called a no-ball. He's probably controlled them so they just get up to rib height, and thus officially don't get counted as a bouncer, but are more intimidatory than anything Thakur serves up.

 

[Spark]

are you defining bouncer as above the shoulder of the batsman in his normal stance? Because a 3rd bouncer in an over would be called a no-ball. He's probably controlled them so they just get up to rib height, and thus officially don't get counted as a bouncer, but are more intimidatory than anything Thakur serves up.

Yep. Another reason the rule is silly

 

[thierry henry]

If a bowler gets warned and then dragged for bowling 2 beamers, tbh doesn’t it make sense to apply the same logic to 3+ bouncers in an over? Might not fit our perceptions of what is dangerous (although bouncers plainly are, even if they are part of the game) but at least that can be logically and consistently applied

 

[Bahnz]

This is enough now I think, Aus should declare.

 

[Starfighter]

Siraj should have had a peg there.

 

[honestbharani]

are you defining bouncer as above the shoulder of the batsman in his normal stance? Because a 3rd bouncer in an over would be called a no-ball. He's probably controlled them so they just get up to rib height, and thus officially don't get counted as a bouncer, but are more intimidatory than anything Thakur serves up.

He has bowled over shoulder ones too but was not called, that is all.

 

[thierry henry]

Yes, MANY times.

I believe you have just told me an outright lie, but I’m open to some evidence

 

[cnerd123]

This is enough now I think, Aus should declare.

and deny either Thakur or Siraj the chance of a 5-fer at the Gabba? That would be cruel.