Agreed. Stokes can go as captain too.
Yeah, that is what I was asking you
If that was the members' stand. Fair enough if it was not. (y)
I don't think you should be run out if you're not attempting a run (or trying to undo a run), but I'm totally fine with players getting stumped even if they're not intending to be out of their crease. I think that separates them a bit, but I can see why people would have different instincts on that.
I don't think anyone thought it was a boundary. From memory they ran two or three from the last ball before tea, Bell tapped his bat in and walked off towards the pavilion, and one of the Indian players took the bails off. So yes it was a run out rather than a stumping but essentially the same in that the batter believed the ball to be dead.
I hope this whole thing goes in the bin.
TBF, we were being mauled in that series. Its not the same situation here. Dare say, if Aus were 3-0 down or whatever as we were, they may have withdrawn this appeal too.
But what style of cricket got England into a position to 'grind them into the dust' in the first place?
He was not charging the bowler in any way, shape or form…he was actually rooted in his crease when he ducked the bouncer. I get now that by the strictest definition of a stumping, that was out, that is definitely not how most stumpings happen though.
Yeah exactly. When you leave it up to captains rather than umpires, it's not going to be consistent.
They did think it was a boundary. And no it's still very different. Bairstow walked out of his crease before the ball had even reached the keeper. It was dumb but it was a textbook stumping. It's not like keeper held it for a bit and waited for him to leave the crease before throwing it.
No it's not.
If Green had been bowling spin with the keeper up and the Bairstow did exactly the same thing people would have just called him an idiot and moved on. You do even see keepers quite regularly delay taking the bails off waiting for the foot to lift.
"Winning the toss on a wet green wicket in overcast conditions-style"
Yes it is, because the rest of what you said in that post isn't what you said in your first one.
Yeah, waiting for the foot to lift as a result of overbalancing from their attempted stroke. Not for the foot to lift to go and talk to the non-striker, come on.
Carey hadn't and it was very smart play. But the umpire had in so far as he wasn't even watching and was giving the bowlers his cap.
It's a decent style, tbf.
They've become arrogant and believed their own hype.
not even what happened, which you'd know if you had seen it.Yeah, waiting for the foot to lift as a result of overbalancing from their attempted stroke. Not for the foot to lift to go and talk to the non-striker, come on.