First Ashes Test Australia v England 23/11/2017.

[bolero]

If you were the third umpire, you have to give one decision Out or Not Out ? What would you decide ? Come straight to the point, yes or no.

I would follow the laws, if I had doubt - I would give it not out. If I had no doubt that it was out, I would give it out.

This is the point.

Based on what you saw, give us one answer, yes or no.It cannot be maybe.Is it so difficult to decide ?

[Katto]

[Boycs]

I've just looked at some stills of the stumping.

1) I think the line is straight, merely the slight change in ground depression when you cross the actual pitch makes it look like the line is closer to the stumps over the actual wicket.
2) Even if it wasn't straight, it didn't suddenly curve for that one ball of Moeen's innings. It was in the same place from ball one and he'd have to take his guard in the correct place to avoid getting stumped as per where the line is on the ground.
3) None of his foot is behind the line. "30.1.1 A batsman shall be considered to be out of his/her ground unless some part of his/her person or bat is grounded behind the popping crease at that end."

Funnily enough the word 'straight' doesn't appear in the definition of the creases: https://www.lords.org/mcc/laws-of-crick ... e-creases/ however it refers to lines being drawn relevant to the ends of the pitch, and (6.1) defines the pitch as being a rectangle

But in either case, the line belongs to the umpire and no part of the batsman is behind the line. It's out.

And England can't piss and moan about it. The other 19 wickets they lost weren't stumped.

[bolero]

I've just looked at some stills of the stumping.

1) I think the line is straight, merely the slight change in ground depression when you cross the actual pitch makes it look like the line is closer to the stumps over the actual wicket.
2) Even if it wasn't straight, it didn't suddenly curve for that one ball of Moeen's innings. It was in the same place from ball one and he'd have to take his guard in the correct place to avoid getting stumped as per where the line is on the ground.
3) None of his foot is behind the line. "30.1.1 A batsman shall be considered to be out of his/her ground unless some part of his/her person or bat is grounded behind the popping crease at that end."

Funnily enough the word 'straight' doesn't appear in the definition of the creases: https://www.lords.org/mcc/laws-of-crick ... e-creases/ however it refers to lines being drawn relevant to the ends of the pitch, and (6.1) defines the pitch as being a rectangle

But in either case, the line belongs to the umpire and no part of the batsman is behind the line. It's out.

And England can't piss and moan about it. The other 19 wickets they lost weren't stumped.

Well said.

[Loose halo]

Well done I assume you found nothing about benefit of the doubt?

[Paddles]

I would follow the laws, if I had doubt - I would give it not out. If I had no doubt that it was out, I would give it out.

This is the point.

Based on what you saw, give us one answer, yes or no.It cannot be maybe.Is it so difficult to decide ?

Bolero, while it is flattering you care what I would have concluded if I were the third umpire, its just not relevant whether I have doubt or not to the argument of whether benefit of the doubt is part of the laws of cricket or not, and whether they apply to the third umpire or not.

As for whether Ali was out, I said this at the time:

On the line is out - but the benefit of the doubt must go with the batsman.

Slats and Warne say out. Clarke says not out.

Twitter and cricket.org are already blowing up.

I don't care to involve myself in this fight - I'm still trying to get over Nigel Llong not giving Nathan Lyon out in Adelaide 2015/16 first innings.

And I still don't care to.

[Paddles]

Well done I assume you found nothing about benefit of the doubt?

Rule 31.6

[Katto]

Based on what you saw, give us one answer, yes or no.It cannot be maybe.Is it so difficult to decide ?

Bolero, while it is flattering you care what I would have concluded if I were the third umpire, its just not relevant whether I have doubt or not to the argument of whether benefit of the doubt is part of the laws of cricket or not, and whether they apply to the third umpire or not.

As for whether Ali was out, I said this at the time:

On the line is out - but the benefit of the doubt must go with the batsman.

Slats and Warne say out. Clarke says not out.

Twitter and cricket.org are already blowing up.

I don't care to involve myself in this fight - I'm still trying to get over Nigel Llong not giving Nathan Lyon out in Adelaide 2015/16 first innings.

And I still don't care to.

you cannot answer a simple yes or no question?

[Loose halo]

A Daily Telegraph bulletin flashed across my I Pad screen stating Bairstow headbutted Bancroft maybe downtown Brisbane. Can't find details on the IT just yet.

[bolero]

Based on what you saw, give us one answer, yes or no.It cannot be maybe.Is it so difficult to decide ?

Bolero, while it is flattering you care what I would have concluded if I were the third umpire, its just not relevant whether I have doubt or not to the argument of whether benefit of the doubt is part of the laws of cricket or not, and whether they apply to the third umpire or not.

As for whether Ali was out, I said this at the time:

On the line is out - but the benefit of the doubt must go with the batsman.

Slats and Warne say out. Clarke says not out.

Twitter and cricket.org are already blowing up.

I don't care to involve myself in this fight - I'm still trying to get over Nigel Llong not giving Nathan Lyon out in Adelaide 2015/16 first innings.

And I still don't care to.

Why can't you take a decision, for Pete's sake ? Nobody is going to eat you up whether you say yes or no.Don't beat around the Bush.

[Paddles]

Bolero, while it is flattering you care what I would have concluded if I were the third umpire, its just not relevant whether I have doubt or not to the argument of whether benefit of the doubt is part of the laws of cricket or not, and whether they apply to the third umpire or not.

As for whether Ali was out, I said this at the time:



And I still don't care to.

you cannot answer a simple yes or no question?

Whether I can is irrelevant when I choose not to.

[Boycs]

Well done I assume you found nothing about benefit of the doubt?

"Each umpire shall answer appeals on matters within his/her own jurisdiction. If an umpire is doubtful about any point that the other umpire may have been in a better position to see, he/she shall consult the latter on this point of fact and shall then give the decision. If, after consultation, there is still doubt remaining, the decision shall be Not out." that's the closest I believe.

[Boycs]

A Daily Telegraph bulletin flashed across my I Pad screen stating Bairstow headbutted Bancroft maybe downtown Brisbane. Can't find details on the IT just yet.

http://www.espncricinfo.com/story/_/id/ ... llegations

Bairstow you Effing prat. Grow up.

[bolero]

I don't care what Slats or Clarke or the Twitter users think ? What do you think ? Out or Not Out ?

[Paddles]

Bolero, while it is flattering you care what I would have concluded if I were the third umpire, its just not relevant whether I have doubt or not to the argument of whether benefit of the doubt is part of the laws of cricket or not, and whether they apply to the third umpire or not.

As for whether Ali was out, I said this at the time:



And I still don't care to.

Why can't you take a decision, for Pete's sake ? Nobody is going to eat you up whether you say yes or no.Don't beat around the Bush.

I choose not to. Part of the reason I choose not to may well be that the more you keep asking me about this, the more I think you missed the point I was arguing. You're so inquisitive as to what my conclusion would be, the issue I was arguing was the process.

[Boycs]

Perhaps he's just baiting you by not answering

[bolero]

Perhaps he's just baiting you by not answering

He reminds me of our politicians.

[bolero]

A Daily Telegraph bulletin flashed across my I Pad screen stating Bairstow headbutted Bancroft maybe downtown Brisbane. Can't find details on the IT just yet.

http://www.espncricinfo.com/story/_/id/ ... llegations

Bairstow you Effing prat. Grow up.

Another Stokes in the making ?

[Katto]

Why can't you take a decision, for Pete's sake ? Nobody is going to eat you up whether you say yes or no.Don't beat around the Bush.

I choose not to. Part of the reason I choose not to may well be that the more you keep asking me about this, the more I think you missed the point I was arguing. You're so inquisitive as to what my conclusion would be, the issue I was arguing was the process.

Do you think every third umpire decision should be conducted by doing a twitter poll?

[Paddles]

I choose not to. Part of the reason I choose not to may well be that the more you keep asking me about this, the more I think you missed the point I was arguing. You're so inquisitive as to what my conclusion would be, the issue I was arguing was the process.

Do you think every third umpire decision should be conducted by doing a twitter poll?

No, of course not, just as I don't think that video evidence removes the possibility of doubt for any and every appeal referred for a third umpire decision.

[Katto]

Do you think every third umpire decision should be conducted by doing a twitter poll?

No, of course not, just as I don't think that video evidence removes the possibility of doubt for any and every appeal referred for a third umpire decision.

What evidence do you have there was any doubt in the mind of the third umpire?

[Paddles]

No, of course not, just as I don't think that video evidence removes the possibility of doubt for any and every appeal referred for a third umpire decision.

What evidence do you have there was any doubt in the mind of the third umpire?

I don't need any evidence to the actual existence of doubt in the mind of the third umpire to discuss what the law prescribing the decision making process is where the law covers both the possible existence of such doubt and not.

The question you probably mean to ask me is whether I think the umpire SHOULD have had doubt on the facts of this particular referral. But as I already replied, I don't care to involve myself in this fight.

[Katto]

What evidence do you have there was any doubt in the mind of the third umpire?

I don't need any evidence to the actual existence of doubt in the mind of the third umpire to discuss what the law prescribing the decision making process is where the law covers both the possible existence of such doubt and not.

The question you probably mean to ask me is whether I think the umpire SHOULD have had doubt on the facts of this particular referral. But as I already replied, I don't care to involve myself in this fight.

okay, then can you answer that question?

[Paddles]

I don't need any evidence to the actual existence of doubt in the mind of the third umpire to discuss what the law prescribing the decision making process is where the law covers both the possible existence of such doubt and not.

The question you probably mean to ask me is whether I think the umpire SHOULD have had doubt on the facts of this particular referral. But as I already replied, I don't care to involve myself in this fight.

okay, then can you answer that question?

My position has not changed.

[Katto]

What fight?

[Paddles]

:doh:

What fight?

The bickering on social media between cricket fans as to whether Ali should have been given out stumped or not.

[Katto]

:doh:

What fight?

The bickering on social media between cricket fans as to whether Ali should have been given out stumped or not.

What does that have to do with this forum?

[Paddles]

The bickering on social media between cricket fans as to whether Ali should have been given out stumped or not.

What does that have to do with this forum?

Be it this forum, another forum, twitter, facebook, websites, or any social media.

[Katto]

What does that have to do with this forum?

Be it this forum, another forum, twitter, facebook, websites, or any social media.

I don't care if you have a different opinion. I just want to know what it is.

[Paddles]

Be it this forum, another forum, twitter, facebook, websites, or any social media.

I don't care if you have a different opinion. I just want to know what it is.

That's kind of you to say and all, but I still don't care enough to give an opinion on the matter.

What I am far more interested in, is whether England will, or should, seek to strengthen their batting for the next game subject to the available players within the squad.

And no, its not simply because Cummins got Ball's wicket in the second innings.

[Boycs]

But with whom should they strengthen their batting? You know how much I loath teams that select bowlers for their batting ability.

[Boycs]

Cook is a big concern this year. Yes he scored 243 against the West Indies this summer, but his scores since then? 11, 23, 10, 17, 2, 7. And even leading up to the double wasn't hugely earth shattering: 3, 69, 3, 42, 88, 7, 46, 10. Admittedly that 88 was pure class against South Africa. He needs a score in the boxing day Test or he's gouing to round off a poor year averaging in the mid-30s.

I wouldn't say a terminal decline, as he averaged 54 in 2015 and 42 (which isn't dire) in 2016 but he's not really setting the world alight considering he's only 32. He should be in his prime.

managed to end his captaincy career with a higher average than his current non-captain average though, if only just.

Argh! Being an England cricket fan is harder than being an England cricket player sometimes....

[Yorkshire]

He still have potential to break S..A..C..H..I..N's 15000 odd test run record in next 3 years or so.

[SuperGLS]

Don't you dare worry about Cookie! He'll be scoring runs in the next match. Lots of them. He's the greatest English batsman of all time of course.

Warner loves this kind of paltry chase. Should be a nice morning session and a gen wicket win.

[Boycs]

Hah super appears when I pick on Cookie

[Paddles]

But with whom should they strengthen their batting?

The 2 obvious choices are Overton for Ball or a new batsman/ keeper batsman if one in the squad for Ball.

You know how much I loath teams that select bowlers for their batting ability.

But England has gone from a 2 AR (Stokes and Ali) and 3 bowler (incl Woakes but sometimes TRJ or Wood) to a 1 AR (Ali) and 4 bowlers. Australia has gone with just 4 bowlers and Marsh got valuable 1st inning runs to demonstrate the value of this.

Ball has effectively taken Stoke's spot in the team and Stokes is not selected for his bowling alone. TRJ was not threatening Stokes' place in the team but Woakes'.

Comparing Overton to Ball with the ball is not like comparing Sami to Younis; Ball has so far this test taken 1w for about 100 runs leaked quickly, far more so than the other 4 bowlers - and offered nix with the bat. The selectors went for experience. His experience is I presume right now 4* games and averaging over 100 per wicket. Overton has not failed in the warmups and is undeniably a better bat.

I havn't seen what further batting options England has in the squad, is Buttler there as res keeper, or is there another specialist bat - is Ballance the only choice? If so - will he likely get some runs at some stage and will 4 bowlers incl Ali get the job done.

Right now it appears swapping Ball with Overton is prolly a more likely option than say Ballance batting at 6.

Theres options to tinker, most obvious involve dropping Ball - but which is best for this team?

I think England needs more batting - and the facts are Ball as a specialist 4th seamer in a 4 seam + 1 spin attack has so far only leaked runs and not scoring 'em.

[bolero]

I agree with most that Ball was not up to the mark. Also Australia have a plan for Cook.Aus has done well.with their 4 bowler attack.

[squarecut]

England hopes were so high till the beginning of the day. In a matter to two sessions it has changed from hopes to despair. God, what a long tour this is turning out to be- that is what some of them may already be feeling.

Coming to the stumping- I did not find anything wrong in the third umpire's decision. It looked out to me. And it looked out to the third umpire- the man who mattered. Even if Ali was given out, there were other batsmen in the team with bats in their hands. Why they did not score runs. Losing four wickets for less than ten runs shows serious lack of temperament, which was so different from the fight shown by Australian lower order batsmen yesterday. It is a case of a team showing better fighting spirit coming up triumphant. That is bound to happen every time.

[Verity]

Don't you dare worry about Cookie! He'll be scoring runs in the next match. Lots of them. He's the greatest English batsman of all time of course.

Warner loves this kind of paltry chase. Should be a nice morning session and a gen wicket win.

I reckon he'll come good with a double ton in Adelaide.

[bolero]

Cook is only good against bowling attacks like India.who.don't know.to.bowl to lefthanders.

Australia came up.with a plan for Cook and executed it well.

[Verity]

I actually think Cook has earnt the right to do a Ponting and play as long as he wants, Ponting went to shit about the same age and played another 6 years

[bolero]

Cook will not retire till he gets to break Tendulkars test record of runs scored.

[bolero]

Currently most test runs scored are
1 Tendulkar
2 Ponting
3 Kallis
4 Dravid
5 Sangakkara
6 Lara
9 Cook

[Boycs]

Can’t be far from Lara

[Verity]

Cook will not retire till he gets to break Tendulkars test record of runs scored.

current form he'll have to play until 45

[TedWard]

Hah super appears when I pick on Cookie

Well done SG.

[Shambles]

Have the Aussies outfoxed England by utilizing Lyon to exploit our well known weakness against the turning ball with our line up of LH's..?? Looks a very clever ploy judjing by the Gabba pitch. Never known one like this. For the 2nd test I'd bat Bairstow at 5 or 6, swap Overton for Ball, & hope Cook gets some runs. Think the only spare batsmen are Ballance & Ben Foakes, who could come in & keep wicket pushing Bairstow up the order, plus I'm sure he's a right hander to nullify Lyon. First post here btw. Hi

[Boycs]

And it’s a good one. Welcome

[Boycs]

Why can’t Smith step on a cricket ball during the warm up for the next test?

[Loose halo]

Weather fine day 5.

Good Youtube on cricinfo about the stumping.

Ali accepts decision gracefully.