***Official*** England in Pakistan

[Scaly piscine]

Are you saying that there was a SECOND incident?

I ask that because the first time, Pietersen wasn't even at the wicket - Trescothick was, because it was just after the explosion was heard.

It was BBC's report not mine, as I've said before I don't hold journalists in very high regard so it wouldn't surprise me if they'd got it wrong.

 

[C_C]

And I suppose you'd rather be enhanced by cybernetic parts, or maybe have robots replace us all, as humans are not good enough anymore with the availability of technology.

Cricket would lose one of its most important elements if umpires were done away with. The human error in the giving of decisions is one of the biggest points of interest and discussion in the game. We wouldn't be able to occupy so much of our time with cricket if it was always just clearly out or not out, leaving us the chance to say nothing but "yeah, ok".

I have no problems with cybernetic parts ( provided they make em superior to human parts- not achieved currently) and if the human body isnt good enough anymore, i wouldnt mind transferring my conciousness to a mechanical body(Again, provided the technology exists).
To argue otherwise is to argue senselessly.
Indeed, the very use of prosthetics in humanity is evidenced enough that the spirit of cybernetics is well underway.
Whether you like it or not, human beings have always complimented themselves with instruments as needed and in many fields, human beings have been replaced simply because they arnt good enough anymore.
And again, whether you like it or not, the human error in the game, is ultimately, a shortcomming of the game.
Since the human errors do not balance out ( it cannot, as there is no such thing as a perfect distribution of errors-it is mathematically impossible actually), cricket would be the winner if onfield umpires got their power cut off with respect to run outs, catches and lbws.
And yet again, whether you like it or not, the fact remains that cricket is the winner with the introduction of technology so far - as well as the fanbase.
Run outs are rarely controversial anymore ( atleast compared to in the pre- 3rd umpire days).
The point is, traditions have no reason to survive once they are outdated and actually holds back the artform/humanity.

 

[ClownSymonds]

Are you saying that there was a SECOND incident?

I ask that because the first time, Pietersen wasn't even at the wicket - Trescothick was, because it was just after the explosion was heard.

Edit:

I'm not sure what I mean any more. Was it at the end or was it after the explosion?

I believe the article was referring to what happened when Pietersen came on the field to replace Trescothick. He had a few words with Afridi, and twirled around to show Afridi what he was talking about. Afridi just laughed at first, but lost his smile as Pietersen grew more visibly angry.

 

[Slow Love™]

I have no problems with cybernetic parts ( provided they make em superior to human parts- not achieved currently) and if the human body isnt good enough anymore, i wouldnt mind transferring my conciousness to a mechanical body(Again, provided the technology exists).
To argue otherwise is to argue senselessly.

I think maybe you meant to say "resistance is futile" here...

 

[Sanz]

What a Day it has been. Forget Ashes, India-Pak..It's the Pak-England matches..they can be never be dull.

On the Afridi incident - how is it different from Fast bowlers trying to roughen the pitch and warned by umpires ? In any case Afridi does get away lot of crap he does on the field and I will be happy If he gets banned for a couple of matches. Also I hope ICC doesn't find Inzi responsible for Afridi's act and punish/ban him for that.

 

[JustTool]

I'd say that of everyone on the ground Bell was worst placed of anyone to know it.

The catcher doesn't know for sure on the tight calls.

Are you related to Botham or just trying to get attention with outrageous statements...? Or both ?

 

[luckyeddie]

I believe the article was referring to what happened when Pietersen came on the field to replace Trescothick. He had a few words with Afridi, and twirled around to show Afridi what he was talking about. Afridi just laughed at first, but lost his smile as Pietersen grew more visibly angry.

Thanks.

With Sky tv flitting back and forth to the studio, the explosion, Trescothick's wicket and close of play all packed into the last half an hour, I just wasn't sure.

/still not

 

[luckyeddie]

What a Day it has been. Forget Ashes, India-Pak..It's the Pak-England matches..they can be never be dull.

On the Afridi incident - how is it different from Fast bowlers trying to roughen the pitch and warned by umpires ? In any case Afridi does get away lot of crap he does on the field and I will be happy If he gets banned for a couple of matches. Also I hope ICC doesn't find Inzi responsible for Afridi's act and punish/ban him for that.

Intent

 

[Mecnun]

While we're at it -- let's ban Vaughno as well as he was captain and Bellow cheated.

So by my tally we've now banned four players and three umpires -- not a bad day's effort. By the end of the fifth day we'll probably be playing five-a-side, with the exploding drinks trolleys as umpires.

*roflmao* that's funny.

 

[ClownSymonds]

Cricinfo says: As well as the decisions and the blast that briefly disrupted play on an incident-filled day, umpires also spoke to Inzamam about some players running onto the pitch during the disruption in an effort, allegedly, to scuff up the pitch. From television replays, Shahid Afridi appeared to have been the culprit but Inzamam refused to elaborate. "The umpires told me about it but I didn't see who had done it. I don't know much about it so I can't comment on that further."

The identity was seemingly confirmed at the end of the day when it was announced that Afridi is to appear at a hearing with the match referee this evening.

 

[Mecnun]

Presumably because there's a big difference between an honest mistake and a deliberate act?

There is and it is the same difference between objectivity and subjetivity.

 

[Mecnun]

Cannot believe people are complaining about Afridi's little dance especially the English fans. He was trying to do Giles and Udal a fricking favour so they may get some turn and subsequently some wickets. He even said in his interview yesterday that the English spinners are struggling!! It should be me as a Pak fan who should be peeved.

Anyhow what an idiot, not like Pak were not in ascendency and did not have good control on the match. The only reason I can think of why he would do this in his misguided wisdom is to retaliate against the decisions of Bell catch, Inzy dismissal and possibly personal feeling about the Trescothic catch. He is a bit unstable as the world knows.

He should be banned ...for stupidity more than anything else but do'nt worry English fans the picth will be heavy rollered and things will be fine tomorrow I hope and no wickets have been lost as a direct consequence of his actions.

I say Ban for two test matches!! Sounds fair no?

Now that is of my mind ..Sweet Jesus.. what a match. I cant believe I missed it but I have for highlights to be recorded as I have a feeling this will be one to remember for all the wrong reasons.

I have seen quite a few posts about two apparent plumb LBW's in this match..when and where? first one was a good shout although a littel high thus the doubt the second one he was clearly outside the line of off. If the second is regards MoYo then I cannot remember it but have it taped so I can watch it later.

On Butt run-out in the first match the camera evidence was *inconclusive* and correct decision was made given the evidence the umpire had.

For Inzy run-out ..ohh well crap happens..

 

[Hazza]

As long as Bell is in, there is nothing to fear

 

[Neil Pickup]

The two LBWs I think oughter've been given were: a) Giles to Yousuf, left arm round, played and missed defensively, thumped the pad in front of middle. Umpire decides Law 36 doesn't actually exist. Then Udal to Inzamam when he missed the pull and was hit on the back leg about six inches in front of middle. Umpire decides stumps are in fact four inches high and as such it was going over.

The Bell to Yousuf shout shortly after was outside the line - I never even got excited about it...

 

[Tom Halsey]

Come off it, it's far far far worse.

How?

Claiming a false catch has resulted in a wicket which shouldn't have been. What Afridi did may only result in one wicket - and as Mo Akram points out it would have done sod-all if he wasn't wearing spikes, and I don't know whether he was or not. Of course, Afridi could cause two wickets which shouldn't have been, we'll never know, but I find it highly unlikely.

For the record, I think both should be banned for 1 or 2 Tests.

 

[Neil Pickup]

Afridi banned for one Test and two ODIs

 

[Barney Rubble]

Afridi banned for one Test and two ODIs

Yay - more Hasan Raza for us to enjoy.

Seriously though, I think that's about fair.

 

[Tom Halsey]

At any rate, from my personal experience, I know if a ball has carried and if it's legitimate or not. It's not that hard.

Yeah, agreed.

As far as I'm concerned, Bell was cheating.

 

[Shahid_Afridi_6]

Yeah, agreed.

As far as I'm concerned, Bell was cheating.

Agree wholeheartedly.

He should be banned.

 

[marc71178]

That's hardly 'well documented' - especially since you haven't provided any specific instances of it being documented.
At any rate, from my personal experience, I know if a ball has carried and if it's legitimate or not. It's not that hard.

It's been discussed on the TV over here several times, usually when a player is diving and rolling on catching.