2nd Match - Australia v England

[Prince EWS]

But yes, DRS rants aside:

Agree with this; players will adapt to it quickly if they're told these playing conditions beforehand. It's clearly a flaw at present but if I were officiating in such a condition I think I'd let the ball play through before making my LBW decision.

This is probably the most sensible solution. Umpires just shouldn't give batsmen out lbw until any possible leg byes have been completed first. Most of the time batsmen aren't trying to run when they're being appealed against so it wouldn't be an issue very often, and this way we wouldn't have to worry about players forgetting (you'd hope umpires wouldn't forget..).

 

[GIMH]

Is the event not the referral in this case?

No the umpire raising his finger.

What do they do in tennis?

 

[Neil Pickup]

A challenge of a line call or overrule by a player/team shall be allowed only on either a point-ending shot or when a player/team stops playing the point during a rally (returns are permitted but then the player/team must immediately stop).

The Chair Umpire may only refuse the Electronic Review if he/she believes that the challenge was not made in a timely manner. Otherwise, the Chair Umpire will use the Electronic Review when there is a player/team challenge. The result of the Electronic Review is final and unappealable.

The Chair Umpire may request an Electronic Review when the Line Umpire was unsighted on a point-ending shot and he/she is unable to make a decision.

If the Electronic Review is unavailable for any reason, then the original line call or overrule will stand.

 

[Antihippy]

This opener had everything though. Centuries, golden ducks, 5fers, dropped catches, screamers, no less than 4 hat-trick attempts with one successful hat-trick, as well as a shocker from the umpires to top it all of. All we're missing are matches that might be a close contest.

Hope the world cup maintains this standard.

 

[flibbertyjibber]

One thing to say, at least the umpire shocker had no impact on the result and just on personal glory of Taylor. I hope there isn't a repeat error in a real close match which would cause a real ****storm.

 

[fredfertang]

That really wasn't the way to start a tournament

 

[grecian]

That really wasn't the way to start a tournament

Indeed, no Ravi, no hope

 

[Debris]

I think that's much less stupid than this situation:



Or another theoretical situation where the non-striker isn't even aware the striker has been given out lbw, runs through, gets run out and then gets a random reprieve because the standing umpire made a bad call originally.

This is probably one of those things where I'm going to be a tiny minority, but it probably stems from my absolute intolerance for bad umpiring decisions having any affect on the game at all when it can be avoided. The only reason we've actually come to this is because my actual solution to this problem -- just doing away with player reviews and having the umpires refer as many things upstairs as they like -- is also unpopular among other fans.

Other fans are correct. Having the umpire refer every decision upstairs would be a nightmare and this is basically what would happen. You would have to extend play for an hour or reduce over requirements to fit it in. Player reviews are a good idea because you can reverse blatantly wrong decisions without faffing about with constant replays. If the team wants to waste them on marginal calls, that is up to them.

 

[Gnske]

Have to give credit to Taylor for taking it graciously and not losing his head in his talks to the umpire.

Still, complete farce from Dharmasena and Third Umpire, hopefully it sets a precedent despite the fact the umpire's should already know, what not to do in the future.

 

[Burgey]

I know it was only England, but Australia was pretty good tonight.

 

[Swingpanzee]

Didn't watch the match due to some (****ty) commitments but from what I've seen of the higlights Australia did really well. Good to see Finch among the runs too, Bailey as well. Awesome start to the WC.

 

[Furball]

Yeah I agree. Replacing Bopara with Ballance was a fair enough option -- not my preferred one, but fair enough and definitely better than just picking Bopara -- but if that was going to happen then Morgan needed to be #6.

Nah, Morgan's a really bad starter. His best innings are when he plays himself in then takes the piss.

 

[HeathDavisSpeed]

Very happy to see Bopara having his best game in an England shirt for a long time. Surprised he didn't faf about a bit more with the drinks - perhaps taking them out one at a time or forgetting to take them altogether on occasions.

 

[jelley17]

Hopefully marshes form leads to watson being pushed out

 

[social]

Didn't watch the match due to some (****ty) commitments but from what I've seen of the higlights Australia did really well. Good to see Finch among the runs too, Bailey as well. Awesome start to the WC.

Game was dead after about 60 overs - it was actually pretty dull for lengthy periods

 

[burr]

Obviously thrilled with the Aus win but it's really unacceptable that a.) the umpire wasn't aware of a pretty basic rule of the game re: dead ball and Taylor dismissal, and b.) no one had the authority to correct the mistake in real time.

 

[Red]

Was at the game. Crushing win for Australia, and England were just fortunate Taylor made it look far more respectable than it might've.

Crowd was interesting, kind of subdued but with a buzz. Not a lot of the normal Melb boganness you get at the cricket. Although I was a fair way away from Bay 13 (in the Ponsford Stand), it seemed pretty quiet. Apart from when Broad fielded on the boundary in front of the Southern Stand and the crowd likened him to Hadlee in terms of personal habit.

 

[3703]

Um, Taylor made 98 runs. How about the fact that that is an excellent achievement rather than focusing on an arbitrary figure that does **** all.

 

[grecian]

Um, Taylor made 98 runs. How about the fact that that is an excellent achievement rather than focusing on an arbitrary figure that does **** all.

No, result clearly needs to be voided.

 

[GIMH]

No, result clearly needs to be voided.

****ing hell another good post from you