South African Tour of the West Indies, May-June 2010

[Dare]

Dare, I noticed his name on that article on cricinfo about the windies plans for improving. I think he's in some sort of development scheme where he's off with a bunch of other players to a high-tech training centre, so they are at least intending to look after him, but they must not rate him ready for the full team.

I noticed his name in that article but before that I searched for a long time and couldn't find anything. Good thing that they have him there along with some other players I am interested in. Should have included Andre Russell in there too.


With no Roach the attack has no pace to it. Pascal is bowling good, much better then Rampaul. Not sure how the spinners will do on this wicket.

 

[pcfan123]

Why did Pascal only get a 3 over spell?

 

[Dare]

Who knows, Gayle has been off with his captaincy since that England home series.

 

[Dare]

Come on Ramdin, thats what your in the side for to take the tweaking catches.

 

[pcfan123]

Damn this is going to be a tweaking draw because of the ridiculously boring style of batting South Africans are prone to.

fearsome tweak fearsome tweak fearsome tweak there goes all my money thanks to the rain. Hoping Steyn can rip through the windies in a day and then I might start a chance. I bet Graeme Smith will fearsome tweak it up though with his ultra conservative captaincy, he is probably happy with a draw.

 

[Dare]

Close call on that LBW.

Smith gone now. Good bowling by Shillingford.

 

[Mike23]

The LBW decision on petersen should've been give out. Shillingford was brilliant today. It's a shame only 30 overs were bowled today.

 

[Dare]

That shouldn't have been given out.

Which one?

 

[Mike23]

Which one?

The lbw on peterson off the bowling of benn ah sorry my bad i meant should have been given out. I don't care if it pitched marginally inside the line that was plumb.

 

[Dare]

Yea I felt the same way but the rule just saved Petersen. Apparently if the ball was a couple of millimeters to the left it would have been out.

 

[Mike23]

I don't get why was petersen given the marching orders after the second review. He was struck outside the line of off-stump.The first one therefore looked more convincing than the second one.I really can't comprehend the laws of this review system atm.

 

[Dare]

I don't get why was petersen given the marching orders after the second review. He was struck outside the line of off-stump.The first one therefore looked more convincing than the second one.I really can't comprehend the laws of this review system atm.

UDRS was used twice today. We shall leave you with Ian Bishop on what the rules state on the UDRS decision. "The regulations state that the centre of the ball should be in the line of wicket to wicket at the point of impact. Stumps to stumps. Here, the centre was just outside off stump. And in that case, the decision of the on-field umpire stays."

"Ian Bishop also said, "If the original decision was OUT and was decision was referred thru UDRS, any part of the ball in the line of wicket to wicket at the point of impact is good enough to hold on-field umpire's decision...."

Thats what explained the decision to me.
When West Indies referred the first Petersen appeal the umpire gave it not out which meant that one half or more of the ball had to be in line with the stumps and apparently it wasn't.
When Petersen referred the LBW of Shane Shillingford he was originally given out which meant that if any part of the ball pitched in line then the decision can be upheld.

 

[Mike23]

Ah seems fair enough. With all these new rules/additions to the game it is getting more complicated, don't know how will it attract the non test playing nations eg USA.

 

[TumTum]

Ah seems fair enough. With all these new rules/additions to the game it is getting more complicated, don't know how will it attract the non test playing nations eg USA.

Oh cmon, this UDRS is so easy to understand.

 

[riz7khan12]

The UDRS is only there to eliminate absolutely shocking descisions, and thus it favours the umpires rather than the player, which in my opinion is good.