Sri Lanka in England 2011

Better off having Bresnan in there (over Broad) IF they want someone who can bat a bit.
 
Am I the only one who wouldn't be bothered about waiting those extra couple of minutes for snicko?

I don't see how a "can't tell" decision could work like that, it's just too vague. Not only could you hear a nick, but the seam rotation was different after passing the bat. I didn't see anything on Hotspot, but it isn't the best on small edges, which is where Snicko comes in, I say wait for it. Test cricket has to adapt, for that time lost, make it the drinks break, or take time out of Lunch/Tea. Flexibility is needed.

People can blame DRS, but it's only as useful as the person on the end of it interpreting it. As with many similar technologies.

Ultimately, I say wait for snicko and get the game to move quicker, the amount of faffing the Sri Lankan batsman was doing was ridiculous. It's about time the ICC take a tougher stance on over rates and actually starting to penalise teams who fail to meet the over rate target (which would be a changeable target in relation to injuries/DRS, etc) which should be a base of 15 an hour.

I don't know why snicko takes so long. They say it's to sync the audio and visual but you only really need the audio. Should take about 10 seconds.
 
You need to know if the noise was made when the ball was going past the bat so you kinda do need the visual...
 
Not really. If you look at the waveform it's basically flat unless there is an edge of the ball hits the pad/thigh etc. You can tell from the shape of the waveform what kind of edge it is. In 90% of cases you don't need the pictures.
 
The DRS is supposed to be a foolproof system for determining whether the umpire did make a mistake or not - making assumptions based on the waveform from snicko wouldn't really reassure most players. It's not certain enough to be included with everything else.
 
But it's true. They could be using a quick and dirty version or even just an idiot proof thing that just measures the sound and just tells the umpire if it was probably an edge
 
Spot the difference:

snicko.jpg
 

[not important what he said but it was about the length of War and Peace and yet again about Broad]

Change the record, mate, yeah? If you really must, there's a whole nother thread about him you can dump this stuff in.

As for whether a paceman MUST bowl 7 overs straight, I'm with you. I can remember times when it would've been considered akin to attempted murder on the captain's part - generally involving someone returning from injury. Does anyone sustain their pace for that long?
 
I suppose it would depend on the type of referral - and how close the bat is to the pad, etc. If it's obvious that it couldn't be anything else but the bat then I don't see why they can't just use the audio signal, but otherwise I'd be skeptical.
 
[not important what he said but it was about the length of War and Peace and yet again about Broad]

Change the record, mate, yeah? If you really must, there's a whole nother thread about him you can dump this stuff in.

I'll take that 'under advisement' and suggest you do one. You don't have to read every post, and there's nothing worse than a muppet whinging about what someone else is posting.

As for whether a paceman MUST bowl 7 overs straight, I'm with you. I can remember times when it would've been considered akin to attempted murder on the captain's part - generally involving someone returning from injury. Does anyone sustain their pace for that long?

Oh so it wasn't all about Broad :rolleyes And it is mostly due to England going with only three seamers and no Collingwood (Trott is there but not nearly as effective)

----------

Better off having Bresnan in there (over Broad) IF they want someone who can bat a bit.

We've got an in-form keeper and Swann in the bottom four as well as Tremlett who can hold a bat from time to time. We don't really need to pick the lower order for batting potential/ability and should focus on their bowling. That is a general point btw
 
We've got an in-form keeper and Swann in the bottom four as well as Tremlett who can hold a bat from time to time. We don't really need to pick the lower order for batting potential/ability and should focus on their bowling. That is a general point btw

I know, but someone suggested they might be picking Broad for his extra batting, so I suggested Bresnan. I personally don't think they need it. I'm a believer in your bottom 4 being picked purely on bowling skill.
 
Tremlett bowling really well, they just can't cope with him, bit of a fightback from Jayawardene and Fernando, but still happy with bowling them out for around 180, but as said before, weather pretty much means it's irrelevant. I'm not expecting play again today.

Broad still quite disappointing, I thought he was a bit better yesterday at times.
 
Hopefully we can still push on and maybe force victory, if not then a draw is enough. Maybe the one thing will come out of this Test, besides maybe a series clinching win/draw, is a rethink of the make-up of the side. We certainly can't afford passengers when the Indians arrive.

I'd hope long-term we might unearth a part-time spinner as good or maybe better than Hick. If we had a Hick type in our side could we not then look at playing four seamers on pitches that cry out for it?
 
It's glorious sunshine here. Has been for weeks. England should just decide to host their matches in mainland Europe ;)
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top