Joel Wilson is the epitome of professionalism in his arena, truly a master of the cricketing arts.No ball for the keeper in front of the stumps by an inch at best
now that’s a new one
It's a legit way of calling no-ball, not as rare as the '3 men behind square on the leg side' rare.I’ve never seen or heard that before in 40 plus years of watching the game
It’s fair enough but I’ve never seen it before , unique in a test match in England in my opinionIt's a legit way of calling no-ball, not as rare as the '3 men behind square on the leg side' rare.
Always been the case since DRS came in I believe.England don’t lose the review because it’s a no-ball, odd rule
I'm hoping S.L can somehow get a lead of 150 or so to at least keep England honest in the chase.
Indeed, setting a challenging target for England in the fourth innings would intensify the competition.I'm hoping S.L can somehow get a lead of 150 or so to at least keep England honest in the chase.
So much is pending on these two to somehow get there.
None from me but I’ve never seen it beforeThe rules of the game worked perfectly there with the various decisions. All the right decisions were reached and more importantly they made sense. No one should have any complaints
Last guy who did that was Pant (?) in the IPL or one of the JamODIs recently.I’m going to check that law in my big book of cricket page 985 paragraph 6 , line 7
well done Joel Wilson for digging that gem out
Cheers. It’s woke me up a bit after the dull bouncer theory came inLast guy who did that was Pant (?) in the IPL or one of the JamODIs recently.