RugbyRebels

Posted: **Wed Mar 28, 2018 9:43 am**

The thing is the is list of teams who haven't tried to tamper with the ball reads as follows:

Posted: **Wed Mar 28, 2018 10:48 am**

cashead wrote:
Digby wrote:The thing is the is list of teams who haven't tried to tamper with the ball reads as follows:
It's not the ball tampering itself that is the issue, or why it's resulted in this level of fury and vitriol aimed at the Aussies.

"Other teams did it" is entirely beside the crux of the argument here.

Other teams did it might be immaterial to you, it is material to me. I don't have an issue with some bans for them seeing as they've been caught red handed, I'm just not especially surprised a team has been caught, and I don't feel any need to excoriate the Aussies for this, or at least not more than any other.

Posted: **Wed Mar 28, 2018 1:35 pm**

Does that mean we won the Ashes afterall then?

Posted: **Wed Mar 28, 2018 2:07 pm**

WaspInWales wrote:Does that mean we won the Ashes afterall then?

Who knows, from the outside we seemed to have more of an issue with pace than reverse swing, maybe the Aussies have found a way to tamper with the ball that makes it go faster.

Posted: **Wed Mar 28, 2018 3:26 pm**

Digby wrote:
cashead wrote:
Digby wrote:The thing is the is list of teams who haven't tried to tamper with the ball reads as follows:
It's not the ball tampering itself that is the issue, or why it's resulted in this level of fury and vitriol aimed at the Aussies.

"Other teams did it" is entirely beside the crux of the argument here.
Other teams did it might be immaterial to you, it is material to me. I don't have an issue with some bans for them seeing as they've been caught red handed, I'm just not especially surprised a team has been caught, and I don't feel any need to excoriate the Aussies for this, or at least not more than any other.

They've paid heavy prices. Quite rightly.

Posted: **Wed Mar 28, 2018 3:48 pm**

Banquo wrote: They've paid heavy prices. Quite rightly.

Everybody got this broken feeling

Posted: **Wed Mar 28, 2018 6:36 pm**

So now there's ickle white-lies too.....
for 'sticky tape' read 'sandpaper' - not alot in it really.
There will be someone with too much time on their hands
micro-analysing & chickin HD footidge looking for pants-to-hand-to-ball-to-pants manoeuvres in the Ashes..
England were still pants, has to be said.

Posted: **Wed Mar 28, 2018 10:11 pm**

I heard someone quoted in radio 4 this morning, but can't remember who. The crux of it was though, that teams that got good reverse swing could be identified in advance by looking at their trousers. They all have pockets with zips.

Posted: **Wed Mar 28, 2018 10:33 pm**

canta_brian wrote:I heard someone quoted in radio 4 this morning, but can't remember who. The crux of it was though, that teams that got good reverse swing could be identified in advance by looking at their trousers. They all have pockets with zips.

'cause they're using the zip on the ball?

I'd have to say I'd expect the umpires to be able to tell over by over if someone were taking a zip and/or sandpaper to the ball

Posted: **Wed Mar 28, 2018 11:03 pm**

Of course there's 2 sides to every ball..
Sucking boiled sweets was helpful for the shiny one..they're probably cleverer now.

Posted: **Thu Mar 29, 2018 7:42 am**

Digby wrote:Word is England might make changes in the bowling department after the heavy defeat to NZ. It's a charmed life the batters lead.

And yes following the 58 all out they've dropped two bowlers. I can't say I'm a fan of Ali as a bowler, but I don't see how they can reasonably pick on the bowlers (again) after the batsmen collectively shat the bed (again)

Posted: **Thu Mar 29, 2018 9:12 am**

Digby wrote:
Digby wrote:Word is England might make changes in the bowling department after the heavy defeat to NZ. It's a charmed life the batters lead.
And yes following the 58 all out they've dropped two bowlers. I can't say I'm a fan of Ali as a bowler, but I don't see how they can reasonably pick on the bowlers (again) after the batsmen collectively shat the bed (again)

well its not one or the other really- batsmen as a collective are wank and the bowlers lack penetration. When Anderson goes there's fck all left.

Ali is shot mentally though; Woakes has been one of better batsmen ironically!

Hopefully having such a long tail will now focus the top order; straw clutched.

Posted: **Thu Mar 29, 2018 9:27 am**

Banquo wrote:
Digby wrote:
Digby wrote:Word is England might make changes in the bowling department after the heavy defeat to NZ. It's a charmed life the batters lead.
And yes following the 58 all out they've dropped two bowlers. I can't say I'm a fan of Ali as a bowler, but I don't see how they can reasonably pick on the bowlers (again) after the batsmen collectively shat the bed (again)
batsmen as a collective are wank and the bowlers lack penetration.

Aren’t these one and the same thing?!?!?!?

Posted: **Thu Mar 29, 2018 9:29 am**

Mellsblue wrote:
Banquo wrote:
Digby wrote:
And yes following the 58 all out they've dropped two bowlers. I can't say I'm a fan of Ali as a bowler, but I don't see how they can reasonably pick on the bowlers (again) after the batsmen collectively shat the bed (again)
batsmen as a collective are wank and the bowlers lack penetration.
Aren’t these one and the same thing?!?!?!?

is this a wank/penetration joke

Posted: **Thu Mar 29, 2018 9:32 am**

Banquo wrote:
Mellsblue wrote:
Banquo wrote: batsmen as a collective are wank and the bowlers lack penetration.
Aren’t these one and the same thing?!?!?!?
is this a wank/penetration joke

Get your mind out of the gutter. It was a searing critique of the......no, you’re right, it was a wank/penetration ‘joke’.

Posted: **Thu Mar 29, 2018 9:46 am**

Digby wrote:
canta_brian wrote:I heard someone quoted in radio 4 this morning, but can't remember who. The crux of it was though, that teams that got good reverse swing could be identified in advance by looking at their trousers. They all have pockets with zips.
'cause they're using the zip on the ball?

I'd have to say I'd expect the umpires to be able to tell over by over if someone were taking a zip and/or sandpaper to the ball

http://www.espncricinfo.com/pakistan-v- ... 82729.html

Posted: **Thu Mar 29, 2018 10:14 am**

canta_brian wrote:
Digby wrote:
canta_brian wrote:I heard someone quoted in radio 4 this morning, but can't remember who. The crux of it was though, that teams that got good reverse swing could be identified in advance by looking at their trousers. They all have pockets with zips.
'cause they're using the zip on the ball?

I'd have to say I'd expect the umpires to be able to tell over by over if someone were taking a zip and/or sandpaper to the ball
http://www.espncricinfo.com/pakistan-v- ... 82729.html

Without clicking on the story I've heard Bancroft's statement about the sandpaper. And not to excuse the players but I would want a word with the umpires as to how the ball didn't look like it had been tampered with

Posted: **Thu Mar 29, 2018 10:23 am**

Digby wrote:
canta_brian wrote:
Digby wrote:
'cause they're using the zip on the ball?

I'd have to say I'd expect the umpires to be able to tell over by over if someone were taking a zip and/or sandpaper to the ball
http://www.espncricinfo.com/pakistan-v- ... 82729.html
Without clicking on the story I've heard Bancroft's statement about the sandpaper. And not to excuse the players but I would want a word with the umpires as to how the ball didn't look like it had been tampered with

Yeah, sorry. The story was about the icc banning zips from 2015. I was thinking that since then players have needed to become more "inventive" about how they "manage" the ball.

Posted: **Thu Mar 29, 2018 10:28 am**

I can't believe no umpire has noticed nothing funny, not if they're using sandpaper, which begs the question as to whether post the Darrell Hair and Pakistan goings on back in 2006 has seen the umpires told not to take action?

Posted: **Thu Mar 29, 2018 4:09 pm**

I see lehmann has gone.

Posted: **Thu Mar 29, 2018 4:12 pm**

canta_brian wrote:I see lehmann has gone.

yep. Smith and Bancroft seemed genuinely upset, but in the former case he still seemed blind as to the likely consequences of what he was sanctioning....sort of, had I known my dad would be so upset, I wouldn't have done it. Odd- think he might not be very smart tbh.

Posted: **Thu Mar 29, 2018 9:54 pm**

Banquo wrote:
canta_brian wrote:I see lehmann has gone.
yep. Smith and Bancroft seemed genuinely upset, but in the former case he still seemed blind as to the likely consequences of what he was sanctioning....sort of, had I known my dad would be so upset, I wouldn't have done it. Odd- think he might not be very smart tbh.

Taking a suggestion from Warner to tamper with the ball to be a good idea in the 1st place sort
of sets his intelligence at a low level.
Also think Warner is a bit of a coward in not fronting up to the mistake as Bancroft & Smith have done.
But then having read some of the stuff about him it shouldn't really surprise me

Posted: **Thu Mar 29, 2018 11:03 pm**

Meanwhile, England have Broad batting 4 places too high at 8

Posted: **Thu Mar 29, 2018 11:35 pm**

Im hoping that Sky, in their desperation to fill a channel dedicated to cricket 24/7 will do a special where they get a series of international top class bowlers to demonstrate what they can do with a ball that has been tampered with in a variety of different ways. Im genuinely curious as to the impact of ball tampering and how far the limits can be stretched if they were given carte blanche to do what is currently against the rules

(A bit like arguing for steroids to be permitted for a special Olympic Games)

Posted: **Fri Mar 30, 2018 12:32 am**

BBD wrote:Im hoping that Sky, in their desperation to fill a channel dedicated to cricket 24/7 will do a special where they get a series of international top class bowlers to demonstrate what they can do with a ball that has been tampered with in a variety of different ways. Im genuinely curious as to the impact of ball tampering and how far the limits can be stretched if they were given carte blanche to do what is currently against the rules

(A bit like arguing for steroids to be permitted for a special Olympic Games)

There's loads of info on this as every bowler is trying things out in the nets pretty much every season. Umpires do grow wise to different strategies which I guess is why we see the action being taken to tamper changing over time. Typically not every bowler will get a tampered ball to do much, it still has to be bowled at the right speed with the right action, if you want every bowler to get a response you need go to town on messing with the ball which would be so obvious in a match with an umpire it's basically pointless

RugbyRebels

Cricket fred

Re: Cicket fred

Re: Cicket fred

Re: Cicket fred

Re: Cicket fred

Re: Cicket fred

Re: Cicket fred

Re: Cicket fred

Re: Cicket fred

Re: Cicket fred

Re: Cicket fred

Re: Cicket fred

Re: Cicket fred

Re: Cicket fred

Re: Cicket fred

Re: Cicket fred

Re: RE: Re: Cicket fred

Re: RE: Re: Cicket fred

Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: Cicket fred

Re: Cicket fred

Re: Cicket fred

Re: Cicket fred

Re: Cicket fred

Re: Cicket fred

Re: Cicket fred

Re: Cicket fred