Its a fair point in terms of this innings but not across the 3 matches so far of course: England have squandered many opportunities and the team has become once again a boys club with an open ended membership.
England now are going through what us KKR fans went through all the years. McCullum came in, made us world beater and then eventually all his tactics went to shite. I see no Bazball or even bat on ball lol! The way Aussie's are playing they are well deserved WTC winners.
You have to be a glorified dimwit to make a post like that. "Random fans"make this sport. The rules aren't much good if the fans think of them as nonsense. I don't care who got who out and which team got the dismissal. I don't want to see that.
Ian Bell got out in a similar dozy manner a few years back. A captain called him back and to date people remember his gesture and him covered in glory. "Random fans"remember these things. Dimwits do not. They just read a rule when they see something like this and see things as black and white.
Post automatically merged:
England are throwing away the Ashes. They keep losing the plot when they have the Aussies by the throat.
Picture this; Boland bowls with Carey standing closer or up to the stumps and the same events ensue. Would you feel differently now because Bairstow should have been more cautious?
I haven’t seen much of controversial reactions from anyone other than the most ‘Barmy’ of English fans (is that the right word?) and the England team themselves who have been high on the copium to deflect attention away from their own shortcomings. By and large everyone has been blaming Bairstow for it and rightfully so, it’s such an easy dismissal to prevent. Even Nass and Morgan said it was as clear a dismissal as one can see, both of them are former captains of this same side and Morgan in particular still has strong links to this team. Do the feelings of these ’random’ fans not matter then?
I’m also bemused you keep calling it cheating. How is it cheating when all events were followed according to law? Call it unconventional or crafty but not cheating, it’s far less worse than staying in your crease after having edged it for one thing. This is also a dismissal that happens more frequently at lower levels which is what these nebulous guardians of the ’spirit of cricket’ want to protect from devolving into a chaotic mess, if it happens without controversy there and the only reaction is to laugh at the batter’s stupidity then why is it any different at the higher level? It’s even done multiple times at higher levels too, the difference is that most batters aren’t stupid enough to walk away from their crease without the ball being dead or the keepers miss the stumps/hit it with the batter in crease and it results in a laugh or free runs. Is Pope a cheat for effecting a runout of de Grandhomme last year?
I also wonder if you’ve watched the replay well enough, Carey threw the ball the moment he had the ball in hand and Bairstow was still in his crease at that point. You can call it dead or willful manipulation of the current rules if Carey held onto it and then did the deed once Bairstow walked away (like many keepers do against spinners where they delay the stumping until the batter raises his foot off the ground) but he took a massive risk based on what Bairstow was doing all over. If he missed and England had an opportunity for more runs then there’s no doubt they would have suddenly considered it not dead (as they should have). For the complaints about there being no skill in it, game awareness is a skill and would you now stop considering run-outs where the ball hits the bowler’s hand and then the non-striker’s end whilst the latter has just mildly walked away from the crease because that is purely luck based and has minimal skill either?
Finally, the Bell runout was different. Comparing them doesn‘t make much sense. I also remember many people being annoyed at Dhoni rescinding the appeal which has only gone up in the years since, do the feelings of these random fans not matter or is it only the ones which are in line with yours that you deem relevant in such scenarios? It’s the perfect example of why we have rules and why they matter at the highest level, the spirit of cricket for all it’s meme-ry still serves a decent role at lower levels where umpiring is an arduous task as it is but at the highest level where livelihoods and careers are at stake and with the benefit of technology, you need far superior standards than unwritten rules and feelings.
Its a fair point in terms of this innings but not across the 3 matches so far of course: England have squandered many opportunities and the team has become once again a boys club with an open ended membership.
England now are going through what us KKR fans went through all the years. McCullum came in, made us world beater and then eventually all his tactics went to shite. I see no Bazball or even bat on ball lol! The way Aussie's are playing they are well deserved WTC winners.
For some reason a lot of his current stint feels eerily similar to the KKR run. With England I think @Aislabie got it spot on, they found a gambit that started off well against a side quietly in crisis and managed to perfect it well enough to work (especially in certain conditions) and they’ve decided to since take more risks due to hubris. You can experiment in that fashion against a weaker side but not against an Aussie side that hasn’t missed a beat.
England now are going through what us KKR fans went through all the years. McCullum came in, made us world beater and then eventually all his tactics went to shite. I see no Bazball or even bat on ball lol! The way Aussie's are playing they are well deserved WTC winners.
Its a fair point in terms of this innings but not across the 3 matches so far of course: England have squandered many opportunities and the team has become once again a boys club with an open ended membership.
For some reason a lot of his current stint feels eerily similar to the KKR run. With England I think @Aislabie got it spot on, they found a gambit that started off well against a side quietly in crisis and managed to perfect it well enough to work (especially in certain conditions) and they’ve decided to since take more risks due to hubris. You can experiment in that fashion against a weaker side but not against an Aussie side that hasn’t missed a beat.
I think we've just come up against an exceptionally good team who have edged it. They've seen how England have been going about it for the last year and been able to formulate plans to counter. You could argue that it is 'wait for England to do something rash'. But they've also had a few more bigger contributions with the bat and done the basics right. They've got 3 100s and 6 50s, England have 2 and 5. The catches and missed stumpings too have cost us more than the batting. Marsh dropped on 12, take off the 106 runs and England almost have a lead.
It's also been 20 years since Australia won in England, I would say after England got away with a 2-2 this side are more determined to get the away win. Reminds me somewhat of the Indian side in 2021, a team that seemed to be on a mission and could find some extra class.
Throughout the series it's felt like selection has been England's problem. No Foakes. No Wood (for whatever reason). No Leach too who has been a pivotal part of the side.
Stokes has passed 6000 runs. 3 wickets and 2 catches from joining Sobers and Kallis as players with 6000 runs, 100 catches and 200 wickets in test cricket. Given that he can barely stand not sure if he'll get the wickets very soon.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.