Goat Posted August 2, 2023 Share Posted August 2, 2023 The English Cricket team have today moved to clarify a confusing facet of the game. Speaking to media after the conclusion of the fourth day’s play in the final Ashes Test, Captain Ben Stokes explained that whining to the umpire after every single over is completely valid. “If you look up the Spirit Of Cricket rulebook, you’ll see berating the umpire about the ball after every over is completely within the rules,” explained Stokes. https://www.betootaadvocate.com/breaking-news/england-confirm-law-10-2-of-spirit-of-cricket-allows-for-10-requests-a-session-to-change-ball/ 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lacessit Posted August 2, 2023 Share Posted August 2, 2023 5 minutes ago, Goat said: The English Cricket team have today moved to clarify a confusing facet of the game. Speaking to media after the conclusion of the fourth day’s play in the final Ashes Test, Captain Ben Stokes explained that whining to the umpire after every single over is completely valid. “If you look up the Spirit Of Cricket rulebook, you’ll see berating the umpire about the ball after every over is completely within the rules,” explained Stokes. https://www.betootaadvocate.com/breaking-news/england-confirm-law-10-2-of-spirit-of-cricket-allows-for-10-requests-a-session-to-change-ball/ The present system is wrong, the ball that was substituted was so different from the ball it replaced it was almost farcical. The rules also state the substitute ball should be at the same level of wear. Clearly, it wasn't. The Australian batsmen had a batting pitch turn into a bowler's paradise, with swing and a yard or two of extra pace off the pitch. Assessment of ball wear should not be left to the subjective assessment of umpires. As with the machinery of reviewing a dismissal with a third umpire, there needs to be instruments that grade balls for wear and hardness accurately. Stokes is deflecting, he probably knows better than anyone that ball change did not pass the pub test. 1 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Goat Posted August 2, 2023 Author Popular Post Share Posted August 2, 2023 Just now, Lacessit said: The present system is wrong, the ball that was substituted was so different from the ball it replaced it was almost farcical. The rules also state the substitute ball should be at the same level of wear. Clearly, it wasn't. The Australian batsmen had a batting pitch turn into a bowler's paradise, with swing and a yard or two of extra pace off the pitch. Assessment of ball wear should not be left to the subjective assessment of umpires. As with the machinery of reviewing a dismissal with a third umpire, there needs to be instruments that grade balls for wear and hardness accurately. Stokes is deflecting, he probably knows better than anyone that ball change did not pass the pub test. The English commentators were laughing about it. It definately changed the outcome of the game and whole series. The fact is we would have won 3-1 if they had not changed the ball, the match was too close to claim otherwise. This is up there with Bodyline. After the match they locked out the Aussies and refused to have a beer with them. They are a disgrace. https://www.betootaadvocate.com/breaking-news/whinging-pommy-<deleted>-probably-wouldnt-have-taken-this-too-well/ 1 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Haveasay Posted August 2, 2023 Share Posted August 2, 2023 Closed the door to avoid a confrontation about the bowler would have immediately noticed, from shining an older ball, to one with shine on both sides. If fair play, draw the difference to the umpires. Stokes and English commentators, lamented the Aussies didn't warn Bairstow by speaking up, then took the opportunity to say nothing with the ball difference. Strange when the shoe is on the other foot. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bignok Posted August 3, 2023 Share Posted August 3, 2023 3 hours ago, Haveasay said: Closed the door to avoid a confrontation about the bowler would have immediately noticed, from shining an older ball, to one with shine on both sides. If fair play, draw the difference to the umpires. Stokes and English commentators, lamented the Aussies didn't warn Bairstow by speaking up, then took the opportunity to say nothing with the ball difference. Strange when the shoe is on the other foot. Bairstow stumping fair. Within rules. Ball change was outside the rules. Umpires broke the rules. So you must be a cheat then if you support this. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post bignok Posted August 3, 2023 Popular Post Share Posted August 3, 2023 23 hours ago, Lacessit said: The present system is wrong, the ball that was substituted was so different from the ball it replaced it was almost farcical. The rules also state the substitute ball should be at the same level of wear. Clearly, it wasn't. The Australian batsmen had a batting pitch turn into a bowler's paradise, with swing and a yard or two of extra pace off the pitch. Assessment of ball wear should not be left to the subjective assessment of umpires. As with the machinery of reviewing a dismissal with a third umpire, there needs to be instruments that grade balls for wear and hardness accurately. Stokes is deflecting, he probably knows better than anyone that ball change did not pass the pub test. Agree. Grade 1, 2, 3,4 balls. Good idea. That old ball looked grade 3 at least. They replaced it with a grade 1 ball. 1 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Goat Posted August 3, 2023 Author Popular Post Share Posted August 3, 2023 5 hours ago, Haveasay said: Strange when the shoe is on the other foot. English double standards. We were robbed. 1 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PETERTHEEATER Posted August 3, 2023 Share Posted August 3, 2023 Cricket? Marginally less exciting than baseball. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woof999 Posted August 3, 2023 Share Posted August 3, 2023 On 8/2/2023 at 10:22 AM, Goat said: whining to the umpire Interesting that you use the word "whining" in your whine. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stocky Posted August 3, 2023 Share Posted August 3, 2023 On 8/2/2023 at 10:49 AM, Goat said: The fact is we would have won 3-1 Nothing worse than a whining Aussie 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bignok Posted August 3, 2023 Share Posted August 3, 2023 (edited) 33 minutes ago, Stocky said: Nothing worse than a whining Aussie Yes there are a few. Lets start with murder. Edited August 3, 2023 by bignok 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norbra Posted August 3, 2023 Share Posted August 3, 2023 43 minutes ago, Stocky said: Nothing worse than a whining Aussie Whinging Poms comes to mind Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red Forever Posted August 3, 2023 Share Posted August 3, 2023 Bad luck Australia . No, what am I saying? Ha ha ha... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goat Posted August 3, 2023 Author Share Posted August 3, 2023 1 hour ago, Woof999 said: Interesting that you use the word "whining" in your whine. i didnt say that. It was just from the news article I kindly shared. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now