England Tour Of Bangladesh 2010

[shirazu]

Tony Hill is terrible, England should be 6 down, didn't think he could make a worse decision than yesterday but he managed.

 

[McLOVIN]

wonder what that deeb guy has to say about this!

Rubel Hossain to Prior, no run, 84.4 mph, oh this is a very close call! Swinging late and full and crashing into Prior's pads bang in front, the umpire Tony Hill shakes his head but replays show it crashing full and hard into leg stump. Very unlucky for Rubel, who's bowling fantastically

 

[McLOVIN]

LMAO. Tony Hill robs Bangla off a wicket. Prior was plumb lbw. not given

not A, already 2nd one for the innings! 2 more innings to go

 

[pcfan123]

another shocker!

 

[Howsie]

Can only feel for Bangladesh here, not's what needed when you're going up against a team like England.

 

[McLOVIN]

and yet again gay decision followed by a match saving partnership

 

[Owzat]

Who decided to abandon the referral system? I know it wasn't clever, especially giving it like a tactic to the two sides, but at least it might have reduced human error. It is just so stupid having replays prove a decision is wrong, yet only let people watching the replays have that luxury and not give it as a basic aid to umpiring decisions.

Let's face it, they spend minutes looking to see if the ball has crossed the boundary, usually a matter of 1-2 runs difference, they use it for run outs and 'fair catches', so why not a couple of quick replays on bat-pads, LBWs (if close) and nicks?!?

There was discussion on 606 (BBC) yesterday about whether Trott was right to crawl along, well his approach may have left him regretting not being more positive, I did try and say that he might not be able to control getting a good ball, bad decision or maybe even "bad luck". Hard to be too critical, he scored half the runs that the top four contributed combined

England have stuck at the task well, for all the criticism of Bell he could be pivotal in the outcome of this Test. I said both sides would settle for five down at lunch, but also England will want to still be batting at tea. Bangladesh won't want England to still be batting at tea, their lead will be all but gone and pressure would mount. Either way it is currently building up to be VERY interesting, although the longer Bell bats the more the game will swing back to England

So what will be the jibe at Bell if he scores a hundred and rescues England? "Only Bangladesh" ? Can't argue they are "icing on the cake" runs, the cake barely had any ingredients in it and he's playing the key role of chef

 

[angryangy]

The bowler is wide on the crease, the ball is swinging in a touch and the batsman is struck inside the line of middle stump. Don't let Hawkeye teach you to expect such balls to result in dismissal, because there is doubt there, they won't always go your way. Furthermore, with the centre of the ball outside of the zone of terror, the umpire's decision would have withstood review, whether it was out or not out.

 

[irottev]

So the teams decided to abandon the review system? Well that's their own faults. I can't believe the consistencies. If it's in place for 1 test it should be in place for all of them.

Oh and that LBW you guys are claiming to be plumb....since when is the ball hitting the outside of leg stump ever plumb? From the angle you can understand some doubt. I think for sure, it's a bad decision, no arguments, but saying it's plumb and making a fuss is just being a cry baby.

The bowler is wide on the crease, the ball is swinging in a touch and the batsman is struck inside the line of middle stump. Don't let Hawkeye teach you to expect such balls to result in dismissal, because there is doubt there, they won't always go your way. Furthermore, with the centre of the ball outside of the zone of terror, the umpire's decision would have withstood review, whether it was out or not out.

Totally agree! Calling it plumb is ridiculous.

 

[McLOVIN]

^ @ angry you got be kidding me? this is 21st century. its not freaking 1940. Those a outs now. It was dead straight. That post was worse than the call.

Umpire following a pattern here, 1st he said no to KPs. then gave Colly out, which was very similar to Prior. And said no to Prior's.

MacLovin added 16 Minutes and 54 Seconds later...

bat and pad, NOT GIVEN to Shakib. Another LBW to Razzak not given. How many times this kinda things happen? Umpire just set their mind on the upper teams to save them.

fliping Tony Hill, the next Ashoka!!

 

[Howsie]

Wow, Jamie Siddon's looked pissed. I don't blame him either, some real shocking umpiring lately, especially the Bell LBW shout.

 

[McLOVIN]

over 10 just from the 2test. Lets not even go to ODIs

 

[Highlander999]

So the teams decided to abandon the review system? Well that's their own faults. I can't believe the consistencies. If it's in place for 1 test it should be in place for all of them.

Oh and that LBW you guys are claiming to be plumb....since when is the ball hitting the outside of leg stump ever plumb? From the angle you can understand some doubt. I think for sure, it's a bad decision, no arguments, but saying it's plumb and making a fuss is just being a cry baby.

Totally agree! Calling it plumb is ridiculous.

I'm with you, yes it should have been given out, but from that image it certainly isn't plumb, a chance it could have been sliding down leg as you pointed out, with it hitting the outside of leg stump.

If it makes MacLovin happy to blame the umpires though, so be it

 

[McLOVIN]

both Bell and Bres talking to both the umpires as if they are about hook up with each other sisters..

 

[Owzat]

The bowler is wide on the crease, the ball is swinging in a touch and the batsman is struck inside the line of middle stump. Don't let Hawkeye teach you to expect such balls to result in dismissal, because there is doubt there, they won't always go your way. Furthermore, with the centre of the ball outside of the zone of terror, the umpire's decision would have withstood review, whether it was out or not out.

BLASPHEMY! You dare challenge the god that is dork-eye? Even though it has been proven to not be 100% accurate, people will believe it because they want to. Either they subscribe to let dork-eye decide LBWs or they leave the "element of doubt" in, personally I know there will always be an element of doubt.

I think the referral system fell on its face because they gave the control of when to use it to players and they were like kids given a weeks supply of candy - it was gone within the hour. I don't see why it should be rationed, frivilous appealing (for replays) could be knocked on the head with sin-bins or runs penalties or something like that - or the umpire could have power of veto and over-rule a call for a replay, or indeed revoke their appeals altogether if they keep trying it on. Surely they should have realised that calling for a referral wouldn't make 'not out', 'out' ?!?!? It became a case of the players wanting another look to convince themselves it wasn't out, almost as if they wanted to sit and watch it on TV as well as play it out in the middle.

I'm sure a replay or two could be got in before a (quick) bowler got back to his mark, enough to double check the umpire's decision. If by then nothing warranted a further replay then resume, otherwise delay the play until a decision is made - simples. Minimises delays as there is a natural delay while bowlers amble back to their mark and captains muck about with fields. I think drinks is an utter waste of time, bowlers and fielders could get drinks at the boundary between deliveries/changes of ends, batsmen might not be out in the middle the full session and the umpires could hold their drinks for them as well as their own. So is there a need for a delay of five minutes when over rates are often down?

Bell on for hundred, another "icing on the cake" hundred or will he get credit for rescuing England - him and the umpires!