• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

*Official* Second Test (Lord's, London) 28 June–2 July

Spark

Global Moderator
The umpire wasn't even watching because he'd turned to give the bowler his cap.

When the ball is in the keepers hands and the batsmen isn't attempting a run, then most would consider the ball to be dead.

By the rules it's out, and Bairstow was really poor but there have been plenty of fismissals down the years that leave a bitter taste and this another one.

By a literal interpretation of this there literally cannot ever be a stumping in cricket. The ball is in the keeper's hands and the batsman isn't attempting a run!

Obviously there's a big big difference between a normal stumping and this one (which is still a stumping!) but it goes to show how hard it is to write a law which makes this not out but still leaves stumpings out. The solution could be "let's not rules lawyer the game" but that'd last about five minutes.
 

Gob

International Coach
My only issue with Barstool dismissal is that right after leaving the ball, he looked back and marked the crease with his back foot

What does that mean? I honestly don't know
 

RossTaylorsBox

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
They should make it so the ball is always live, you have to quickly leave your crease to pat down the pitch and rush back, batsmen can run when the bowler misses the ball getting thrown back to them, etc.
 

mackembhoy

International Regular
I hope our players are hurting from this defeat.

Root, Pope, Brook, Duckett- all out hooking when we were right on top.

Forget about the Bairstow dismissal etc, that's where we lost this match.

Some matches you lose, some the opposition win - this is very much in the former category for me.
They went won't change their approach and when it's 0-5 I hope they enjoy the warranted scrutiny.

Ben just still banging on about clarity. Then doubling down when being challenged on his team using their brains/tactics.
 

Spark

Global Moderator
They should make it so the ball is always live, you have to quickly leave your crease to pat down the pitch and rush back, batsmen can run when the bowler misses the ball getting thrown back to them, etc.
Seriously I swear I see the ball being quietly thrown at the stumps like a dozen times a game and the batsman casually put his bat down, it happens all the time. This is the first time I've seen someone dismissed because they weren't though.
 

social

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Len Pascoe is throwing a wobbly on Facebook about Australia bowling so many bouncers

Pot meet kettle
 

cricman

International 12th Man
I'm curious does anyone know what the odds were before the Ashes of no drawn test?

Also I'm assuming you can Arbitrage off these Ashes by betting on Both Eng Win and Aus win
 

loterry1994

International Debutant
By a literal interpretation of this there literally cannot ever be a stumping in cricket. The ball is in the keeper's hands and the batsman isn't attempting a run!

Obviously there's a big big difference between a normal stumping and this one (which is still a stumping!) but it goes to show how hard it is to write a law which makes this not out but still leaves stumpings out. The solution could be "let's not rules lawyer the game" but that'd last about five minutes.
imagine you bet on a run out on that wicket and then you see it come up as a stumping you’d be absolutely losing your marbles
 

Top