You're a very deluded chap. You think we all love Test match Boult but treat white ball Boult as a completely different entity that we despise?
Did Howsie give us his take on Lord Mills' effort, or is he is an ND-based vampire who can't see the 'haterz' when they exist in his own mirror?
This whole thing reminds me of that KFC ad from a couple of years ago, where Americans got up in arms yelling about how racist it was having taken things out of their respective ethnographic contexts and superimposing the American cultural narrative over the top.
Thats a little different, they are the KFC brand, they sponsor cricket and the team touring was the West Indies. The broadcast that was put out on Australian TV (and ads don't go worldwide) was totally clear. It was American media that took it out of context. It's fairly clear that the uproar wasn't from the cricket watching audience but rather the American one who digested the ad alone.
Oh yeah, certainly, I'm just thinking in terms of people immediately jumping on the "IT'S RACIST" bandwagon before looking at the context. The guy on the video mentions giving people the benefit of the doubt (in spite of doing exactly the opposite by wholly ignoring the context), and it's pretty easy to see why one would be extremely willing to give Styris the benefit of the doubt here.
It's pretty simple. McCleneghan is a very inconsistent bowler in both pace and release, so batsmen can never trust the bounce while facing him. This is why he gets so many seemingly lucky wickets; batsmen see a loose ball, but his natural variation means they fail to find the middle of the bat and scoop it to a fielder. It's the same as what Wagner does.
Whether that 3 meter rule one of Vettori's was out or not, it's the ICC who introduced that rule, not the umpires, so can't see how a conspiracy can be claimed for that.
Nah, the Vettori decision was just a result of the way the DRS rules are set up. They have no more reason to feel pissed about that than they do about an umpire's call lbw review.
