Cricket Thread

goalmole said:
Rewatch the incident in the clip I've posted and you'll see that Bairstow ducks, the ball passes over his head, Bairstow at no point thereafter looks behind him to see what has happened to the ball. He doesn't even watch it into the keepers hands. For all he knows, the keeper could have missed the take, dropped the take, it could be going for byes, in any of these scenarios the ball would have been alive and Bairstow wouldn't have been any the wiser.
For argument's sake, what if the keeper had dropped the take, Bairstow had walked out of his crease, the keeper had picked up the ball and thrown it at the stumps?
At the very least it was sloppy and gormless cricket from Bairstow.
If anyone wants to look at the link I've posted, it shows that at no time was the ball settled in the keepers hands. He receives the ball and throws it at the wicket in one fluid action.
There was never a pause or hiatus in play.
There was only one person to blame for Bairstow losing his wicket, and that was Bairstow.
Click to expand...
You're completely missing the point, along with all the others trying to justify Australia's unsporting behaviour.
 
Last edited:
Citizen of Legoland said:
Hopefully England can put this behind them and find a way to wind them up in the next game.
Click to expand...

I hope England don't put it behind them. They were hopping mad. I don't think for one second that Stokes would have played that innings for the ages if he hadn't been. I hope they take that fury to Headingley, and channel it.
 
Edghill OG said:
Bairstow believed the over was completed and the ball was dead. Which it was as the ball was in the keepers hands. No way either batsmen were going to take a run. Marked his crease with his foot and then walked towards the middle of the pitch presumably to have a chinwag with Stokes before the next over commenced and the Aussies knocked the bails off his wicket. Umpire even looked confused as hadn't given it. Then the Aussies appealed and it was given out.
Click to expand...
The ball wasn’t dead he assumed it was you are correct
 
Lovebitesandeveryfing said:
I hope England don't put it behind them. They were hopping mad. I don't think for one second that Stokes would have played that innings for the ages if he hadn't been. I hope they take that fury to Headingley, and channel it.
Click to expand...

Agree 100 percent. It tastes so sour as if it hadn't happened I think Australia would have won by 100+ runs anyway. The Aussies will do anything to win as they've demonstrated time and again.

The sense of injustice seemed to galvanise everybody. Stokes in particular, the crowd and even the old toffs in the Long Room. The Aussies didn't expect that reaction- particularly being at Lords- and I think the incident is the worst thing they could have done. They looked flustered and it's a shame we didn't pull off the impossible. Carry that anger onto Headingley, get it back to 2-1 and go from there.
 
Last edited:
Lovebitesandeveryfing said:
It's a bit astonishing that Boycott, who played dozens and dozens of times against the Aussies and should know them inside out, imagines that they'll do any such thing.
They are, and always have been, a team that's prepared to do anything that's right on the line of what's acceptable to win. No way will they apologize. They wouldn't be Australians.
I'm hoping that this means that the England players will go into the last three tests with fire in their bellies.
Click to expand...
The Headingly and Old Trafford crowd will be well up for it now.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
✖
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.