Print

Please post once and this message will disappear! Introduce yourself, say hello, jump into a discussion...

[poondu]

England won the toss and elected to bat first

[dextrous]

off to a solid start..another belter?

[k-slice]

flat wicket. any place where strauss has such a good strike rate cannot have life in it.

[gouravk]

it is a flat wicket but actually strauss played quite well ... and now west indies are doing quite well with the ball ... there is an outside chance they might restrict england to 400 and could be game on

[gouravk]

serious stufff from edwards. high octane quality consistent pace bowling. on the other hand rubbish from powell.

[keep-it-cool]

who has picked edwards in the ipl?

[dextrous]

serious stufff from edwards. high octane quality consistent pace bowling. on the other hand rubbish from powell.

edwards? or you mean taylor? edwards has been very expensive

[gouravk]

nope. i mean edwards. the figures do him no justice whatsoever. he has been superb.

[WicketView]

Anyone followed the third day? It seems that there were two terrible decisions from the 3rd umpire. From the cricinfo description it seems at least one was a glaring error.

I think there should be no leniency for glaring errors by a third umpire. One mistake and the guy should be kicked out for good.

[gouravk]

i didnt. but what an INNINGS from sarwan ! what an INNINGS ! absolutely fabulous ! 

[dextrous]

84.5 Anderson to Chanderpaul, OUT, Anderson's got him! The inswinger darts back into Chanderpaul who shoulders arms, and up goes the finger. As you'd expect, it's been referred by Chanderpaul and the problem now is height. Now, the third umpire doesn't have the benefit of predictive hawkeye so they can't tell whether it would've gone over the stumps, but they don't even need hawkeye. It is that obvious. Up goes the finger for a second time. Well, for all England's celebrations, that decision really does sum up the sham of a system that this referral experiment is 
 S Chanderpaul lbw b Anderson 70 (134b 11x4 0x6) SR: 52.23 
The fact is, the third umpire needs conclusive evidence to uphold or decline the onfield umpire's original decision. Even without Hawkeye, it was blatant that the ball was going over the top yet it was still given out. Truly, depressingly bonkers and England have their breakthrough

[dextrous]

95.2 Swann to Nash, OUT, that's close - he's rapped him on the pads and up goes the appeal. Oh lord. Here we go again - Strauss has called for a referral. Now the umpire turned that down. So, can Daryl Harper be 100% certain the ball is going to hit the stumps? Perhaps a little high, so it won't be a surprise if it's given not-out. I don't know why it's taking so long - it seems perfectly straightforward: there is enough doubt to vindicate the original not-out decision. We're coming up to two minutes of wasted time, and - well, I am flabbergasted. He has been given out. Again, it was fairly clear the ball was going over the top yet Harper has told the onfield umpire to change his decision. I'm afraid I'm speechless 
 BP Nash lbw b Swann 33 (43b 5x4 1x6) SR: 76.74 

[dhruvdeepak]

this is idiotic. the 3rd umpire should be given full powers!!!!!!!!

[WicketView]

this is idiotic. the 3rd umpire should be given full powers!!!!!!!!

You are wanting more of this ?

[dhruvdeepak]

this is idiotic. the 3rd umpire should be given full powers!!!!!!!!

You are wanting more of this ?

actually, less.

the difference between the referral system when we used it in the india-sl series last summer, and now is that the 3rd umpire is not given full powers.

so basically in an lbw appeal, you can ask for a referral, but the 3rd umpire cannot overturn a decision that he thinks is wrong. there has to be a huge amount of doubt or a clear inside edge or the ball has to be obviously pitching outside legstump.

the 3rd umpire in today's referral system cannot query the on-field umpire's judgment of height (which was the problem in the Test match ysterday) nor can he query the on-field umpire's judgment of whether the ball has swung too much or too little!
what is the point of the referral system for lbw's then!

i agree with not using hawkeye's predictive technology for lbw's. but what is the point of the referral if we are not actually getting the benefit of the technology? what if the 3rd umpire feels that the ball is going over the stumps, and that the on-field umpire made the wrong decision?

isnt that the whole point? you seek a referral because you think the on-field umpire made a mistake.

we can get a CLEAR view of height by looking at the side-on replay. you dont need hawkeye. but the 3rd umpire does not have the power to say - mate i think you're wrong and the ball is going over the stumps. i have the benefit of technology up here. not out.

[WicketView]

this is idiotic. the 3rd umpire should be given full powers!!!!!!!!

You are wanting more of this ?

actually, less.

the difference between the referral system when we used it in the india-sl series last summer, and now is that the 3rd umpire is not given full powers.

so basically in an lbw appeal, you can ask for a referral, but the 3rd umpire cannot overturn a decision that he thinks is wrong. there has to be a huge amount of doubt or a clear inside edge or the ball has to be obviously pitching outside legstump.

the 3rd umpire in today's referral system cannot query the on-field umpire's judgment of height (which was the problem in the Test match ysterday) nor can he query the on-field umpire's judgment of whether the ball has swung too much or too little!
what is the point of the referral system for lbw's then!

i agree with not using hawkeye's predictive technology for lbw's. but what is the point of the referral if we are not actually getting the benefit of the technology? what if the 3rd umpire feels that the ball is going over the stumps, and that the on-field umpire made the wrong decision?

isnt that the whole point? you seek a referral because you think the on-field umpire made a mistake.

we can get a CLEAR view of height by looking at the side-on replay. you dont need hawkeye. but the 3rd umpire does not have the power to say - mate i think you're wrong and the ball is going over the stumps. i have the benefit of technology up here. not out.

You are giving a completely different picture from cricinfo, where they don't suggest that the 3rd umpire did not have the power to overturn the decision based on the replay. Are the current rules available somewhere?

[dhruvdeepak]

this is idiotic. the 3rd umpire should be given full powers!!!!!!!!

You are wanting more of this ?

actually, less.

the difference between the referral system when we used it in the india-sl series last summer, and now is that the 3rd umpire is not given full powers.

so basically in an lbw appeal, you can ask for a referral, but the 3rd umpire cannot overturn a decision that he thinks is wrong. there has to be a huge amount of doubt or a clear inside edge or the ball has to be obviously pitching outside legstump.

the 3rd umpire in today's referral system cannot query the on-field umpire's judgment of height (which was the problem in the Test match ysterday) nor can he query the on-field umpire's judgment of whether the ball has swung too much or too little!
what is the point of the referral system for lbw's then!

i agree with not using hawkeye's predictive technology for lbw's. but what is the point of the referral if we are not actually getting the benefit of the technology? what if the 3rd umpire feels that the ball is going over the stumps, and that the on-field umpire made the wrong decision?

isnt that the whole point? you seek a referral because you think the on-field umpire made a mistake.

we can get a CLEAR view of height by looking at the side-on replay. you dont need hawkeye. but the 3rd umpire does not have the power to say - mate i think you're wrong and the ball is going over the stumps. i have the benefit of technology up here. not out.

You are giving a completely different picture from cricinfo, where they don't suggest that the 3rd umpire did not have the power to overturn the decision based on the replay. Are the current rules available somewhere?

well the 3rd umpire doesnt make the decision. he 'advises' the on-field umpire. but not on judgment calls of height or swing/deviation. it is only abt pitching outside leg, inside edges, 'concrete' stuff like that.

and end of the day, the on-field umpire can say "thanks but no thanks, i still think its out"

95.2 Swann to Nash, OUT, that's close - he's rapped him on the pads and up goes the appeal. Oh lord. Here we go again - Strauss has called for a referral. Now the umpire turned that down. So, can Daryl Harper be 100% certain the ball is going to hit the stumps? Perhaps a little high, so it won't be a surprise if it's given not-out. I don't know why it's taking so long - it seems perfectly straightforward: there is enough doubt to vindicate the original not-out decision. We're coming up to two minutes of wasted time, and - well, I am flabbergasted. He has been given out. Again, it was fairly clear the ball was going over the top yet Harper has told the onfield umpire to change his decision. I'm afraid I'm speechless

this was just incompetence by the umpiring team.

[dhruvdeepak]

3. The process of consultation
3.1. On receipt of an eligible and timely request for a review, the on-field umpire will make the sign of a television with his hands in the normal way.
3.2. He will initiate communication with the TV umpire by confirming the decision that has been made and that the player has requested a review.
3.3. The TV umpire must then work alone, independent of outside help or comment, other than when consulting the on-field umpire.
3.4. A two-way consultation process should begin to investigate whether there is anything that the TV umpire can see or hear which would indicate that the on-field umpire should change his decision.
3.5. This consultation should be on points of fact, where possible phrased in a manner leading to yes or no answers. Questions requiring a single answer based on a series of judgements, such as “do you think that was lbw?” are to be avoided.
3.6. The TV umpire shall not withhold any factual information which may help in the decision making process, even if the information is not directly prompted by the on-field umpire‟s questions. In particular, in reviewing a dismissal, the TV umpire may notify the on-field umpire of conclusive evidence of other modes of dismissal, beyond that initially reviewed.
3.7. The TV umpire should initially check whether the delivery is fair under Law 24.5 („fair delivery – the feet‟) and under Clause 42.4.2(a) („full toss passing above waist height‟), where appropriate advising the on-field umpire accordingly.
3.8. If despite the available technology, the TV umpire is unable to answer with a high degree of confidence a particular question posed by the on-field umpire, then he should report that the replays are „inconclusive‟. The TV umpire should not give answers conveying likelihoods or probabilities.
3.9. Specifically when advising on lbw decisions, the requirement for a high degree of confidence should be interpreted as follows:
3.9.1. with regard to determining the point of pitching and the point of impact, the evidence provided by technology should be regarded as definitive and the Laws as interpreted in 9.1 and 9.2 should be strictly applied
3.9.2. with regard to stating whether the ball was likely to have hit the stumps:
 if a „not out‟ decision is being reviewed, the TV umpire should have a high degree of confidence that the ball would have hit the stumps below the level of the bails in order to report that the ball would have hit the stumps
 if an „out‟ decision is being reviewed, the TV umpire should have a high degree of confidence that the ball would have made no contact with any part of the stumps or bails in order to report that the ball would have missed the stumps.
3.10. The on-field umpire must then make his decision based on those factual questions that were answered by the TV umpire, any other factual information offered by the TV umpire and his recollection and opinion of the original incident.

3.11. The on-field umpire will reverse his decision if the nature of the supplementary information received from the TV umpire leads him to conclude with a high degree of confidence that his original decision was incorrect. He must be satisfied with any decision that he makes, since the responsibility for the decision remains with him.

[justforkix]

but in the midst of all this, what an innings by Saravannan thambi 

[gouravk]

exactly what i said !

i think he is the MOST underrated batsman in the WORLD !

[justforkix]

could have been 4 100s in a row if not for a unnecessary shot on 96 in Antigua !!

Can WI bat the whole of today and get a lead 

[ganavk]

exactly what i said !

i think he is the MOST underrated batsman in the WORLD !

he is blossoming only in this series. Let us not go overboard for all the talent he still averages like 41 or so in test cricket.

[WicketView]

They get the lead. Sarwan finally falls for 291 apparently equalling Richard's highest, missing the triple by a whisker. And Ramdin gets a hundred too!

[ramshorns]

Amazing series for Sarwan.  Good to see some consistency and putting a price on his wicket.

[LosingNow]

here is the dream scenario for WI.. they score another 100 runs before end of day with a lead of 150+.. put England to bat and pressure them into a typical English collapse

[vincent]

here is the dream scenario for WI.. they score another 100 runs before end of day with a lead of 150+.. put England to bat and pressure them into a typical English collapse

No. If I were Chris Gayle, I would declare now and try to get 2 or 3 wickets of the tired fielders.

[LosingNow]

That is an interesting option too. leave 13 overs for England to bat.. and unleash Taylor et al at them

[LosingNow]

last 4 overs..9, 9, 6, 14 runs. This is good stuff

[gouravk]

exactly what i said !

i think he is the MOST underrated batsman in the WORLD !

he is blossoming only in this series. Let us not go overboard for all the talent he still averages like 41 or so in test cricket.

but he is a lovely player to watch !

[LosingNow]

149 run lead and 2 testy overs.. exciting 5th day coming up, given England's tendency to collapse

[WicketView]

149 run lead and 2 testy overs.. exciting 5th day coming up, given England's tendency to collapse

Both tests are headed for an interesting 5th day!

[justforkix]

exactly what i said !

i think he is the MOST underrated batsman in the WORLD !

underrated by who ? definitely not by any of his opponents.

[justforkix]

149 run lead and 2 testy overs.. exciting 5th day coming up, given England's tendency to collapse

Both tests are headed for an interesting 5th day!

I would not agree - it will need an inspired bowling spell or poor batting by Eng to make this test interesting.

[gouravk]

exactly what i said !

i think he is the MOST underrated batsman in the WORLD !

underrated by who ? definitely not by any of his opponents.

well he never got the credit and recognition that say a chanderpaul or even a gayle got. first of course there was the huge task of coming out of the shadow of the legend of lara.

moreover even in world cricket we see lot of players who shine for a year or two get a lot of spotlight - but sarwan never got that - take for example clarke,strauss,devilliers,duminy,even bravo - all got their share of the spotlight based on a short period of performance. sarwan has been performing for over 6 years now ...

[justforkix]

well he never got the credit and recognition that say a chanderpaul or even a gayle got. first of course there was the huge task of coming out of the shadow of the legend of lara.

moreover even in world cricket we see lot of players who shine for a year or two get a lot of spotlight - but sarwan never got that - take for example clarke,strauss,devilliers,duminy,even bravo - all got their share of the spotlight based on a short period of performance. sarwan has been performing for over 6 years now ...

I disagree. Sarwan's talent was always recognized, but so was his lack of consistency. Sarwan was 1st choice as captain before Gayle, which means he has got the recognition. Also, Chanderpaul better get more credit and recognition than Sarwan - his consistency and a +10 differential in averages should count for something !!

performing for over 6 years  - before his excellent run this year, he was averaging below 40 !!

[dhruvdeepak]

exactly what i said !

i think he is the MOST underrated batsman in the WORLD !

he is blossoming only in this series. Let us not go overboard for all the talent he still averages like 41 or so in test cricket.

emmm, no.

he averages 70 since his comeback from injury (around this time last year)

http://stats.cricinfo.com/statsguru/engine/player/52969.html?class=1;spanmax1=2+Mar+2009;spanmin1=18+Feb+2008;spanval1=span;template=results;type=batting;view=innings


Career averages    Mat    Inns    NO    Runs    HS    Ave    BF    SR    100    50    0    4s    6s    
unfiltered    78    136    8    5507    291    43.02    11859    46.43    14    31    10    703    14    Profile
filtered    11    17    0    1204    291    70.82    2292    52.53    5    5    0    133    6    

Innings by innings list Runs    Mins    BF    4s    6s    SR    Pos    Dismissal    Inns       Opposition    Ground    Start DateAscending    
80    262    199    5    0    40.20    3    caught    2       v Sri Lanka    Providence    22 Mar 2008    Test # 1869
72    278    206    3    0    34.95    3    lbw    4       v Sri Lanka    Providence    22 Mar 2008    Test # 1869
57    -    86    8    0    66.27    3    caught    2       v Sri Lanka    Port of Spain    3 Apr 2008    Test # 1872
102    -    172    15    0    59.30    3    caught    4       v Sri Lanka    Port of Spain    3 Apr 2008    Test # 1872
7    21    9    1    0    77.77    3    caught    2       v Australia    Kingston    22 May 2008    Test # 1875
12    86    31    1    0    38.70    3    caught    4       v Australia    Kingston    22 May 2008    Test # 1875
65    173    146    4    1    44.52    3    caught    2       v Australia    North Sound    30 May 2008    Test # 1877
128    381    241    18    1    53.11    3    caught    4       v Australia    North Sound    30 May 2008    Test # 1877
20    46    25    2    1    80.00    3    caught    2       v Australia    Bridgetown    12 Jun 2008    Test # 1879
43    87    56    6    0    76.78    3    lbw    4       v Australia    Bridgetown    12 Jun 2008    Test # 1879
8    20    16    2    0    50.00    3    caught    2       v New Zealand    Dunedin    11 Dec 2008    Test # 1897
11    14    19    2    0    57.89    3    caught    1       v New Zealand    Napier    19 Dec 2008    Test # 1900
1    13    15    0    0    6.66    3    lbw    3       v New Zealand    Napier    19 Dec 2008    Test # 1900
107    360    290    10    0    36.89    3    bowled    2       v England    Kingston    4 Feb 2009    Test # 1906
TDNB    -    -    -    -    -    -    -    -       v England    North Sound    13 Feb 2009    Test # 1907
94    196    133    14    1    70.67    4    caught    2       v England    St John's    15 Feb 2009    Test # 1908
106    247    196    12    0    54.08    3    bowled    4       v England    St John's    15 Feb 2009    Test # 1908
291    -    452    30    2    64.38    3    bowled    2       v England    Bridgetown    26 Feb 2009    Test # 1911

[dhruvdeepak]

could have been 4 100s in a row if not for a unnecessary shot on 96 in Antigua !!

Can WI bat the whole of today and get a lead 

hahaa. not so funny now 

[ganavk]

exactly what i said !

i think he is the MOST underrated batsman in the WORLD !

he is blossoming only in this series. Let us not go overboard for all the talent he still averages like 41 or so in test cricket.

emmm, no.

he averages 70 since his comeback from injury (around this time last year)

http://stats.cricinfo.com/statsguru/engine/player/52969.html?class=1;spanmax1=2+Mar+2009;spanmin1=18+Feb+2008;spanval1=span;template=results;type=batting;view=innings


Career averages    Mat    Inns    NO    Runs    HS    Ave    BF    SR    100    50    0    4s    6s    
unfiltered    78    136    8    5507    291    43.02    11859    46.43    14    31    10    703    14    Profile
filtered    11    17    0    1204    291    70.82    2292    52.53    5    5    0    133    6    

Innings by innings list Runs    Mins    BF    4s    6s    SR    Pos    Dismissal    Inns       Opposition    Ground    Start DateAscending    
80    262    199    5    0    40.20    3    caught    2       v Sri Lanka    Providence    22 Mar 2008    Test # 1869
72    278    206    3    0    34.95    3    lbw    4       v Sri Lanka    Providence    22 Mar 2008    Test # 1869
57    -    86    8    0    66.27    3    caught    2       v Sri Lanka    Port of Spain    3 Apr 2008    Test # 1872
102    -    172    15    0    59.30    3    caught    4       v Sri Lanka    Port of Spain    3 Apr 2008    Test # 1872
7    21    9    1    0    77.77    3    caught    2       v Australia    Kingston    22 May 2008    Test # 1875
12    86    31    1    0    38.70    3    caught    4       v Australia    Kingston    22 May 2008    Test # 1875
65    173    146    4    1    44.52    3    caught    2       v Australia    North Sound    30 May 2008    Test # 1877
128    381    241    18    1    53.11    3    caught    4       v Australia    North Sound    30 May 2008    Test # 1877
20    46    25    2    1    80.00    3    caught    2       v Australia    Bridgetown    12 Jun 2008    Test # 1879
43    87    56    6    0    76.78    3    lbw    4       v Australia    Bridgetown    12 Jun 2008    Test # 1879
8    20    16    2    0    50.00    3    caught    2       v New Zealand    Dunedin    11 Dec 2008    Test # 1897
11    14    19    2    0    57.89    3    caught    1       v New Zealand    Napier    19 Dec 2008    Test # 1900
1    13    15    0    0    6.66    3    lbw    3       v New Zealand    Napier    19 Dec 2008    Test # 1900
107    360    290    10    0    36.89    3    bowled    2       v England    Kingston    4 Feb 2009    Test # 1906
TDNB    -    -    -    -    -    -    -    -       v England    North Sound    13 Feb 2009    Test # 1907
94    196    133    14    1    70.67    4    caught    2       v England    St John's    15 Feb 2009    Test # 1908
106    247    196    12    0    54.08    3    bowled    4       v England    St John's    15 Feb 2009    Test # 1908
291    -    452    30    2    64.38    3    bowled    2       v England    Bridgetown    26 Feb 2009    Test # 1911

That does not negate what I said earlier. In his last series against NZ he had an average of 20. For my liking he is far too inconsistent but as you said he has improved once he is back from injury

[ramshorns]

exactly what i said !

i think he is the MOST underrated batsman in the WORLD !

he is blossoming only in this series. Let us not go overboard for all the talent he still averages like 41 or so in test cricket.

emmm, no.

he averages 70 since his comeback from injury (around this time last year)

http://stats.cricinfo.com/statsguru/engine/player/52969.html?class=1;spanmax1=2+Mar+2009;spanmin1=18+Feb+2008;spanval1=span;template=results;type=batting;view=innings


Career averages    Mat    Inns    NO    Runs    HS    Ave    BF    SR    100    50    0    4s    6s    
unfiltered    78    136    8    5507    291    43.02    11859    46.43    14    31    10    703    14    Profile
filtered    11    17    0    1204    291    70.82    2292    52.53    5    5    0    133    6    

Innings by innings list Runs    Mins    BF    4s    6s    SR    Pos    Dismissal    Inns       Opposition    Ground    Start DateAscending    
80    262    199    5    0    40.20    3    caught    2       v Sri Lanka    Providence    22 Mar 2008    Test # 1869
72    278    206    3    0    34.95    3    lbw    4       v Sri Lanka    Providence    22 Mar 2008    Test # 1869
57    -    86    8    0    66.27    3    caught    2       v Sri Lanka    Port of Spain    3 Apr 2008    Test # 1872
102    -    172    15    0    59.30    3    caught    4       v Sri Lanka    Port of Spain    3 Apr 2008    Test # 1872
7    21    9    1    0    77.77    3    caught    2       v Australia    Kingston    22 May 2008    Test # 1875
12    86    31    1    0    38.70    3    caught    4       v Australia    Kingston    22 May 2008    Test # 1875
65    173    146    4    1    44.52    3    caught    2       v Australia    North Sound    30 May 2008    Test # 1877
128    381    241    18    1    53.11    3    caught    4       v Australia    North Sound    30 May 2008    Test # 1877
20    46    25    2    1    80.00    3    caught    2       v Australia    Bridgetown    12 Jun 2008    Test # 1879
43    87    56    6    0    76.78    3    lbw    4       v Australia    Bridgetown    12 Jun 2008    Test # 1879
8    20    16    2    0    50.00    3    caught    2       v New Zealand    Dunedin    11 Dec 2008    Test # 1897
11    14    19    2    0    57.89    3    caught    1       v New Zealand    Napier    19 Dec 2008    Test # 1900
1    13    15    0    0    6.66    3    lbw    3       v New Zealand    Napier    19 Dec 2008    Test # 1900
107    360    290    10    0    36.89    3    bowled    2       v England    Kingston    4 Feb 2009    Test # 1906
TDNB    -    -    -    -    -    -    -    -       v England    North Sound    13 Feb 2009    Test # 1907
94    196    133    14    1    70.67    4    caught    2       v England    St John's    15 Feb 2009    Test # 1908
106    247    196    12    0    54.08    3    bowled    4       v England    St John's    15 Feb 2009    Test # 1908
291    -    452    30    2    64.38    3    bowled    2       v England    Bridgetown    26 Feb 2009    Test # 1911

10 fifties in 17 innings with 5 centuries ought to be good for any one in Test cricket.  I do not care who you are.  Sarwan is on the uptick and is only 29.  So it boards really well for him.

[justforkix]

btw, where is this Bravo fellow - has he taken early retirement