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

[Linda]

Id like to know why the umpires judge with their eyes, when its fairly simple to go out there and check with the light meter. Takes out the grey area.

 

[howardj]

That is ridiculous.

Warne on from one end and Clarke about to bowl from the other. Just who was going to be in physical danger from that attack?

You have to take a reality check on that though. It's not all about physical danger, otherwise spinners could bowl until mid-night, couldn't they?

Having said that, I really think some umpires are full of self-importance, and are too keen to impose themselves on the game. The idea that the batsmen - with Warne and Katich bowling - could not pick up a new ball to the extent that it jeopardised their wicket, is so divorced from reality, that it is frightening.

 

[Demolition Man]

Cough, whinging on radio about umpiring decisions, appealing vehemently after the umpire says not out, ranting at the umpire and opposition coach, harassing the umpire after every very good shout is turned down.

*cough* bodyline

 

[Slow Love™]

It's true that the interpretation of the light decisions is ridiculous, but it's been this way for pretty much as long as I've been watching cricket.

Umpires have always been more tolerant if you have spinners working at both ends, but even then, there is always a limit in terms of light quality at which they will go off anyway. The only way you could have a real grievance specific to this match is if somehow, they went off on a reading that was more (in terms of more light) than they generally would. According to Mark Nicholas, the rule has been changed on this to reflect the long-standing interpretation umpires have been using, and the word "physical" has been removed from where "danger" is mentioned, which I guess means "danger of not seeing the ball enough to defend your wicket".

And TBH, I think the Aussies would have gone off it was offered, too.

 

[Demolition Man]

Id like to know why the umpires judge with their eyes, when its fairly simple to go out there and check with the light meter. Takes out the grey area.

a rule supported by shep no doubt

 

[Jamee999]

It's not fair, to make us try and read Warne in this light, fair enough it's not going to kill the batsman, but it's an unfair advantage that Australia would be gaining.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

And TBH, I think the Aussies would have gone off it was offered, too.

Quite right, I think Ponting would have gone off too, although I don't think Taylor or Waugh would have.

That's not the point though, with spin from both ends the light shouldn't have been offered.

 

[Jamee999]

*cough* bodyline

*Cough* taking drugs

 

[Slow Love™]

Wow. Rudi's the most South African man in the world. What an accent!

"Diplomatic Immunity".

BANG.

 

[superkingdave]

Channel 4 picking out completely the wrong part of the law there, there is somethin about danger

but

(b)If at any time the umpires together agree that the condition of the ground, weather or light is not suitable for play, they shall inform the captains and, unless
(i) in unsuitable ground or weather conditions both captains agree to continue, or to commence, or to restart play,
or (ii) in unsuitable light the batting side wishes to continue, or to commence, or to restart play,
they shall suspend play, or not allow play to commence or to restart

noticibly when they put the one about danger on screen they left out the part where is says "notwithstanding b"

 

[social]

IIRC the law was changed to remove 'physical danger' from it, England fell foul of this in SA

Nope, still states physical danger to batsmen, fielders and umpires.

I dont blame the batsmen, they did absolutely the right thing but that was a nonsensical decision.

 

[superkingdave]

Nope, still states physical danger to batsmen, fielders and umpires.

I dont blame the batsmen, they did absolutely the right thing but that was a nonsensical decision.

as above it does say that in a different part of the law

 

[Slow Love™]

Quite right, I think Ponting would have gone off too, although I don't think Taylor or Waugh would have.

That's not the point though, with spin from both ends the light shouldn't have been offered.

You are right, and it shouldn't. My point is that it's the norm - some of the commentators are reacting as if this is was a controversial decision, just because two spinners were operating. But they do it all the time.

 

[social]

It's not fair, to make us try and read Warne in this light, fair enough it's not going to kill the batsman, but it's an unfair advantage that Australia would be gaining.

Wouldnt make any difference, they cant pick him in broad daylight

 

[steds]

It was pitch black out there, man! The umpires even gave them a bit of leeway - and McGrath responded by bowling a bouncer!

a) It IS NOT pitch black. If that's pitch black, Merseyside must only see the light of day about 40 days a year.

b) Remember England winning in the dark in Pakistan? If they didn't go off then, why go off now? This is double standards and hypocritical by the England team.

c) If I paid good money to go and watch the deciding Ashes test, and the batsmen ran off at the first sight of clouds, I'd be mighty ****ed off. You have to remember that the main reason for professional cricket is entertainment, and they aren't entertaining anyone when sat in a pavilion

 

[Scaly piscine]

Nope, still states physical danger to batsmen, fielders and umpires.

I dont blame the batsmen, they did absolutely the right thing but that was a nonsensical decision.

There are other criteria, it doesn't just go on that one.

It's too dark to be considered fair to the batsmen. Atherton completely missing the point as per usual.

 

[Jamee999]

Wouldnt make any difference, they cant pick him in broad daylight

That's not the point any you know it, we won't be able to see the ball coming out of Clarke's hand, and that's just stupid!

 

[steds]

*cough* bodyline

That was what? 70 years ago? LET IT GO!!!!!

 

[MoxPearl]

why dont they have lights at a cricket ground....

 

[aussie]

Lol. That's one of the funniest posts I've ever read.

nice to see u can find laughter in my grief