Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


[http://s8.zetaboards.com/ratetheref/register//]Join our community![/url]


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Locked Topic
England v West Indies - Third Test; Old Trafford 7-11 June
Topic Started: Thursday, 31. May 2007, 14:39 (529 Views)
crispy
Member Avatar


Still no Freddie, and no Hoggy either.

Same 11 anyone?

* * * * * * * * * * *
The Windies are also without Sarwan for the series as well.

I'm predicting another fairly comfortable English victory, weather permitting.
Posted Image Posted Image

Posted Image
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Deleted User
Deleted User

Wouldn't change anything.
Goto Top
 
Deleted User
Deleted User

I'm also in the no-change boat.
Goto Top
 
Deleted User
Deleted User

367-9 at the moment. The tail is wagging a bit. Terrific knock from Ian Bell was ended just 3 runs short of what would've been yet another superb century.
Goto Top
 
Deleted User
Deleted User

Yay for the kiss of death. 370 all out.
Goto Top
 
crispy
Member Avatar


Didn't catch the highlights on C5 last night, but it seems a fast, hard pitch - so fingers crossed we can do the job with the ball - Bell did well with his 97, the Windies bowled well in patches which was good to see, I like a competitive game of cricket rather than a walkover.

I suspect Monty will like a bouncy track as well :thumbup:
Posted Image Posted Image

Posted Image
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Deleted User
Deleted User

It's a strange pitch, not particularly easy to score runs on. I don't think our total is at all bad, especially considering we were in a poor position at 5 down.

Harmison's still not right, his 1st over went for 10 runs which included 4 byes and 2 wides...but 2 superb deliveries, one of which got rid of Ganga.

Minor controversy in the innings break as Harmison and Plunkett did a spot of bowling on the square with Allan Donald. In the laws of course this isn't allowed and Bumble was saying those 2 shouldn't have been allowed to bowl for half an hour's playing time, but that appears not to have been the case.
Goto Top
 
Deleted User
Deleted User

Poll-Axed
Jun 8 2007, 13:39 PM
Minor controversy in the innings break as Harmison and Plunkett did a spot of bowling on the square with Allan Donald.  In the laws of course this isn't allowed and Bumble was saying those 2 shouldn't have been allowed to bowl for half an hour's playing time, but that appears not to have been the case.

Windies Protest (click).
Goto Top
 
crispy
Member Avatar


Poll-Axed
Jun 8 2007, 15:05 PM
Poll-Axed
Jun 8 2007, 13:39 PM
Minor controversy in the innings break as Harmison and Plunkett did a spot of bowling on the square with Allan Donald.  In the laws of course this isn't allowed and Bumble was saying those 2 shouldn't have been allowed to bowl for half an hour's playing time, but that appears not to have been the case.

Windies Protest (click).

Hmmmm, interesting!!

I wonder what the restrictions are, because quite often they "prepare" a practice pitch for bowlers first thing on a morning before play starts, so I am not too sure what the problem is here.
Posted Image Posted Image

Posted Image
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
crispy
Member Avatar


Doesn't look like Plunkett and Harmison's "practice" did them much good, they are getting slated on CricInfo! :P
Posted Image Posted Image

Posted Image
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Deleted User
Deleted User

crispy
Jun 8 2007, 16:27 PM
Doesn't look like Plunkett and Harmison's "practice" did them much good, they are getting slated on CricInfo! :P

Rightly so, they're still all over the place, its a great shame.
Goto Top
 
Deleted User
Deleted User

If you click the above link now, you'll find that the match referee has rejected the protest.
Goto Top
 
wisden17
No Avatar


Right well just to let you know what the laws state in relation to what Harmison was doing with regards to practice.

The relevant law is Law 17, which says (only the relevant parts quoted):

1. Practice on the field
(a) There shall be no bowling or batting practice on the pitch, or on the area parallel and immediately adjacent to the pitch, at any time on any day of the match.

(B) There shall be no bowling or batting practice on any other part of the square on any day of the match, except before the start of play or after the close of play on that day. Practice before the start of play
(i) must not continue later than 30 minutes before the scheduled time or any rescheduled time for play to start on that day.

(d) If a player contravenes (a) or (B) above he shall not be allowed to bowl until
either at least one hour later than the contravention
or there has been at least 30 minutes of playing time since the contravention
whichever is sooner. If an over is in progress at the contravention, he shall not be allowed to complete that over.

The ICC regulations amend this slightly by stating:

"The use of the square for practice on any day of any match will be
restricted to any netted practice area on the square set aside for that
purpose."

It's a fairly well known law, although at the grass-roots level not implemented much. The reason for this is that the toss can't take place earlier than 30 minutes before the scheduled (or rescheduled!) start of play.

This means that by law you are not allowed do any practice (on the sqaure at least) after the toss (and when you know what it is your team will be doing). In theory you should be using th nets at this stage to practice bowling etc.

Surprised umpires didn't impose the penalty, or the referee didn't do anything about it.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Deleted User
Deleted User

Very handy that we have the old Almanac registered to help us out!
Goto Top
 
microscopist
Member Avatar
Member
Quote:
 
Surprised umpires didn't impose the penalty, or the referee didn't do anything about it.


Seems very strange to me - you may think that the law is a triviality but nonetheless the collective wisdom of the cricket authorities choose to retain it, so surely it should be applied. There isn't the usual explanation of not being able to see something clearly and the penalty is clearly defined and hardly draconian. Leaves the match officials exposed to embarrassment if a number of more critical marginal decisions go against the West Indies.
AKA Cassandra
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Deleted User
Deleted User

Dinesh Ramdin has taken a blow below the eye and gone off, Dwayne Bravo (he really is an all-rounder!) has taken his place behind the stumps.

Darren Sammy has completed an impressive 5-wicket haul in his 1st test. And Alastair Cook has managed yet another test century, his sixth.
Goto Top
 
Deleted User
Deleted User

These are 2 fabulous umpires, Bowden and Dar.
Goto Top
 
microscopist
Member Avatar
Member
I agree entirely they are fabulous umpires - that doesn't stop me from thinking the decision was strange.
AKA Cassandra
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Deleted User
Deleted User

microscopist
Jun 10 2007, 22:48 PM
I agree entirely they are fabulous umpires - that doesn't stop me from thinking the decision was strange.

Assuming you're still referring to the incident with the practice on the square, I agree.
Goto Top
 
wisden17
No Avatar


It appears that the 4th Umpire was the one who was sent out to deal with the incident, or was the one who spotted it. I think it was Tim Robinson who was the 4th umpire, I haven't double checked so maybe wrong.

He simply told them to stop the bowling and it was left at that. It is one of those laws that most players, and even more surprisingly coahces (and bowling coaches it would seem!) are unaware of; mainly because it is never applied by umpires.

I know at the level I operate it is a law that has a fairly lax interpretation (i.e. if they're taking the p**s we'll get them off, but most umpires will allow them an extra 10 minutes or so practice). I've never seen anyone pracitce on the square in between innings, and to be honest would think that is much more serious than practice before the start of play. Depending on the level of the match I would apply the penalty (if it was a premier league match most definitely I would; where if it was a Sunday friendly game, a quiet word would be more appropriate).

Very surprised the quiet word option was taken at this level though! It is essentially akin to a mandatory caution shall we say. The laws are very clear and give no scope for any other action.

Interestingly enough, of course, the law doesn't penalise batsmen who want to have a practice!

Offline Profile Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
« Previous Topic · Cricket · Next Topic »
Locked Topic

Free Domains Forwarding
RTR-ipad Theme by bmb