***Official*** Australia in England (The Ashes)

[Top_Cat]

Err pitches a foot or thereabouts outside leg, can't be out lbw to that. England should be glad of the respite when Warne bowls outside leg, but instead they're making it into an attacking line.

It's been clear for many years that against Warnie, outside leg-stump *IS* an attacking line, mate. I mean seriously, how many wickets has he gotten with it?

I don't think aussie was saying the umpire should even the score either, but I wouldn't rule out that it might have been in the back of Koertzen's mind, 'cause it made little sense to give that one.

I don't think Koertzen would be as highly-regarded as he is if that was the case.

And as I speak, Flintoff seems to be a bit injured. Uh oh; if he's is injured, that's effectively two players England have lost.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

No you cannot. If it pitches outside leg stump you cannot be LBW (unless Asoka's umpiring, of course)

Really? My understanding was that the two qualifications on the LBW rule (must hit in line, must not pitch outside leg) went out the window when the batsman was not attempting to play the ball?

 

[Craig]

What an odd injury...

How did he do it?

 

[BoyBrumby]

Looks like he's gonna have a go. A lot of ticker from the big fella. He must be in a lot of pain.

 

[superkingdave]

Really? My understanding was that the two qualifications on the LBW rule (must hit in line, must not pitch outside leg) went out the window when the batsman was not attempting to play the ball?

you need to check on your understanding then

 

[Slow Love™]

That new slo-mo camera is amazing. Bell's edge was a pretty thin one, but the view from behind showed the bat fractionally vibrating as the ball connected. Incredible stuff.

 

[Top_Cat]

Ooooo, Flintoff looking VERY sore right now. I would think a shoulder-high bouncer wouldn't go astray from Warnie; even if he doesn't hit the spot, he'll force Flintoff to use it and we'll see if it's really injured.

 

[Craig]

If Flintoff's out - then odd's are he must be a doubt for the remainder of the series - let alone in OT.

Everything bad that could happen to England this morning has happened.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

How did he do it?

Beats me. Stepped back, cut, took one step down the pitch and his knees buckled and he grabbed his shoulder.

 

[Scaly piscine]

It's been clear for many years that against Warnie, outside leg-stump *IS* an attacking line, mate. I mean seriously, how many wickets has he gotten with it?

Oh give over, if Giles does it, it's negative, when Warne does it, it's attacking.

 

[Slow Love™]

Really? My understanding was that the two qualifications on the LBW rule (must hit in line, must not pitch outside leg) went out the window when the batsman was not attempting to play the ball?

No, you can kick the ball till the cows come home, so long as it pitches outside leg. What you do find is that the umpires will be a lot more liberal about where it pitches otherwise (and whether you're struck in line etc) when you don't play a shot.

 

[Craig]

Ooooo, Flintoff looking VERY sore right now. I would think a shoulder-high bouncer wouldn't go astray from Warnie; even if he doesn't hit the spot, he'll force Flintoff to use it and we'll see if it's really injured.

You suggesting he's faking?

Seems unlike the man.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

Haha. Gillespie just choked on that one.

 

[Pedro Delgado]

Now I am depressed.

 

[BoyBrumby]

Christ. Dizzy shells a sitter. It's about time we had some luck!

 

[aussie]

oh Dizzy

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

Oh give over, if Giles does it, it's negative, when Warne does it, it's attacking.

That might have something to do with the fact that Warne turns it a couple of feet and bowls people?

Warne going around the wicket is sometimes a negative tactic, but not when the pitch is turning like this, and unlike Giles it's not his stock tactic.

 

[Shane Warne]

So Gillespie can neither bowl or catch then.

 

[Craig]

Lunch is 10m away surely England can hold on?

 

[Top_Cat]

Oh give over, if Giles does it, it's negative, when Warne does it, it's attacking.

Once again you make an argument against something I've never said and in fact, something I completely disagree with (that Giles bowls negatively).

You suggesting he's faking?

Seems unlike the man.

Not in the slightest. But it's possible that he just over stretched it, it hurt a lot but it wasn't injured after he rubbed it and used it.

And Snicko suggests Bell didn't hit it. Hmmmmmm...................the appeal seemed instant which isn't the case if the 'keeper senses doubt in my experience.