The ICC really need to do something about bowlers going off the field so called "injured" after completing their 10 overs.
Come on guys, you are better than these Ian Smith style idiotic rants. Varun got his foot injured intercepting that hit from Mitchell in his 8th over. Its an external injury and therefore, the rules are very clear that he is allowed to go off whenever he wants and it wont matter how long he spent in the field whenever he does have to bowl.So Varun is off the field, then is allowed to bowl, and then goes straight off after. The asterisks on this win are piling up!
4D chess from Shami, 40 overs in the makingWe need to go after Shami as the Indian spinners look unhittable.
That's a choice he made tho, strategic injury imoCome on guys, you are better than these Ian Smith style idiotic rants. Varun got his foot injured intercepting that hit from Mitchell in his 8th over. Its an external injury and therefore, the rules are very clear that he is allowed to go off whenever he wants and it wont matter how long he spent in the field whenever he does have to bowl.
Also not today I'm not, let me have some fun instead of being a polite kiwi who supports a team that punches above their weightCome on guys, you are better than these Ian Smith style idiotic rants.
so hes injured but can bowl?Come on guys, you are better than these Ian Smith style idiotic rants. Varun got his foot injured intercepting that hit from Mitchell in his 8th over. Its an external injury and therefore, the rules are very clear that he is allowed to go off whenever he wants and it wont matter how long he spent in the field whenever he does have to bowl.
Yeah funny how injuries work in cricket huh? Batsmen can bat injured, bowlers can bowl injured. Or are you new to the concept?so hes injured but can bowl?
Yeah.. spot the salty rant here. Do you even understand the rules of cricket?well get henry out there to bowl his 10 and then come off