I still reckon it looked like LB to the naked eyeDemolition Man said:Hawkeye said out.
Does that mean Ramprakash and Hick are betting than Vaughan, Trescothick etc. then?aussie said:based on performances in CC which is the basis on which they get selected for England, Bell has outscored them & i for one have seen all 3 bat on TV & at matches, Bell has the best technique to cope with Australia but has failed, thats why i dont think either of the rest would have made a difference.
Well ok then, but unless they are back a very long way, they shouldn't be given (for that much turn).FaaipDeOiad said:Yeah, I must say I've seen Warne get a lot of those over the years. If a batsman goes right back on his stumps and is totally beaten by the turn and gets hit more or less in front of off (I realise this was fractionally outside) they get given a lot. Murali gets those as well.
Considering that it was out, what would you consider appropriate?Dasa said:That appeal was quite...boisterous from Warne. Bit too much IMO.
Clueless.social said:Watched it many times.
Heard David Lloyd say you cant give it out over and over again.
But, for the life of me, he's speaking in hope
Tthat was absolutely plumb.
Turned a mile, hitting middle and leg. Not outside off. Simply out.
By out I mean it hit leg stump.cameeel said:I still reckon it looked like LB to the naked eye
I'm not saying it should have been given, I said it usually would be, and indeed it would as Warne gets those a lot.zinzan12 said:C'mon Faaip...your letting yourself down with that sort of comment. You can't honestly said without a shadow of a doubt that...1) that he wasn't playing a shot, and 2) it was definately going to hit the stumps.
For me it was 50-50 ......I wouldn't have been suprised if it was given, and I wasn't that suprised that it wasn't
I think Warne always appeals a bit too much...great bowler, but that really puts me off. What really gets to me is even after it's been given not out, he keeps on appealing.social said:Considering that it was out, what would you consider appropriate?
He fulfilled the being back requirementKnopfler said:Well ok then, but unless they are back a very long way, they shouldn't be given (for that much turn).
Again ......its only because in the last 12 months or so Australia have been given nearly every 50-50 call, suddenly every decision isn't going for Aust....and the umpires are cheats. As I've said before, Australia haven't had nearly as bad a time with the umpires in this series as NZ and Pakistan did in Australia last year. Welcome to the real world...not all 50-50 decisions go your way. You've at least had a few go your way in this test, which is more than can be said for NZ and Pakistan last yearDemolition Man said:Seriously fellas unless they are plumb the aussies aint gonna get any LBWs today.
where does Ramprakash & Hick come into this mate...Scaly piscine said:Does that mean Ramprakash and Hick are betting than Vaughan, Trescothick etc. then?
I was thinking more another 5-7aussie said:superb 1st hour for Australia, i still cant believe why KP wasn't given out but overall i'm happy. Another 2 before lunch is whats needed.
No he didn't. Not enoughcameeel said:He fulfilled the being back requirement
How we've gone in the past has nothing to do with this test match, the fact is that Australia have been very hard done by in terms of the umpiringzinzan12 said:Again ......its only because in the last 12 months or so Australia have been given nearly every 50-50 call, suddenly every decision isn't going for Aust....and the umpires are cheats. As I've said before, Australia haven't had nearly as bad a time with the umpires in this series as NZ and Pakistan did in Australia last year. Welcome to the real world...not all 50-50 decisions go your way. You've at least had a few go your way in this test, which is more than can be said for NZ and Pakistan last year