The Cricket Thread

[RichA]

https://wisden.com/stories/your-gam...rks-debate-over-niche-misapprehension-law/amp

However, the MCC later clarified that Egerton-Read was correctly given out. With none of the umpires signalling a dead ball, the ball was still in play, and as the batter was out of his crease, the fielding side were within their rights to run him out. “If the batter is leaving his wicket under a misapprehension of being out, the ball remains live until an umpire calls Dead ball,” the organisation tweeted. “It doesn’t become dead just because he left the wicket.”

 

[greenone]

You can't account for incompetence on the umpire(s) account. The laws are clear.

 

[Mudball]

You can't account for incompetence on the umpire(s) account. The laws are clear.

Given RichAs post… will you reconsider my umpire friend to stand in your match..

 

[greenone]

Given RichAs post… will you reconsider my umpire friend to stand in your match..

No, as per the laws it should be not out and the umpire should call dead ball. the fact the umpire cocked it up is the only reason for the MCC clarification.
I'm old school in that I read the laws at least once a year and it always amazes me how many people playing and to a lesser extent officiating in the recreational game have such a poor grasp of the rules/laws be it cricket, golf or whatever sport.

 

[fundy]

Good riddance Harrison, lets hope for a competent replacement

 

[RichA]

The reason the MCC got involved is because it went viral, they are the owners of the Laws of Cricket and they have a social media presence. I don't think it was because they felt the need to proactively cover up an error by a couple of voluntary officials in the Hampshire 3rd Division (South) Saturday afternoon cricket league.
The umpires' job at any level of cricket is to ensure fair play and apply the laws - not to leap in to protect a player who negligently gives his wicket away.
The cock ups were committed by the batter who edged the ball and flounced off and the keeper who dropped an easy catch.

 

[Junior]

So we're a few weeks into the county season.....what's the first test team ? I think they'll go with the below.

I think (rightly or wrongly) Bairstowe will come back from the IPL and be given the gloves.

The other option would be to bat him at 5 and Foakes at 7.

Lees
Jennings
Crawley
Root
Brook/Bairstowe/Pope
Stokes
Bairstowe/Foakes
Robinson
Broad
Anderson
Parkinson

 

[greenone]

The reason the MCC got involved is because it went viral, they are the owners of the Laws of Cricket and they have a social media presence. I don't think it was because they felt the need to proactively cover up an error by a couple of voluntary officials in the Hampshire 3rd Division (South) Saturday afternoon cricket league.
The umpires' job at any level of cricket is to ensure fair play and apply the laws - not to leap in to protect a player who negligently gives his wicket away.
The cock ups were committed by the batter who edged the ball and flounced off and the keeper who dropped an easy catch.

But the umpire(s) didn't apply the laws. The batsman tucked his bat under his arm, I've never seen any batsmen set off for a run and then tuck his bat under his arm halfway down the pitch.

 

[RichA]

But the umpire(s) didn't apply the laws.

I understand what you're saying, but if the batter chooses to walk off while the ball is still very much live then it's on him, nobody else. This guy tried to get back into his ground, once he realised he'd been dropped, so he wasn't thinking the ball was dead.
Other than a no ball or wide, I can't think of any situation where a cricket umpire dynamically makes an instant signal and call while the ball and players are still in motion. They're encouraged to apply a few seconds of thought.
I'm fairly certain that if the ball had gone through the wicket keeper and over the boundary rope then the batting team would be claiming their 4 runs, rather than requesting a dead ball as their man had walked away thinking he was out.
This isn't exactly a unique scenario - it just happens to have been filmed and gone viral. Pretty standard village cricket stuff.

 

[fundy]

Looks a typical England squad for the tests, a number 3 who doesnt bat there, a number 5 whos still at the IPL, no leg spinner and one of the longer tails in international cricket

Wheres this brave new approach

 

[Deleted member 15344]

Surprised that they didn’t go with Parkinson , not surprised about Bairstow

The number 3 spot is the one that’s baffling -Malan did ok

Maybe they didn’t want to do too many changes but they are rock bottom at the moment so was a perfect chance to start again

 

[Junior]

 

[Junior]

Only Hasan Ali has more div 1 wickets in first class cricket this year than Parkinson yet we go with Leach ?????

No surprises with the batting. Pope will move upto 3 despite never batting there for Surrey. The only dilemma is whether Bairstow will keep which allows them to pick Brook over Foakes.

 

[fundy]

Only Hasan Ali has more div 1 wickets in first class cricket this year than Parkinson yet we go with Leach ?????

No surprises with the batting. Pope will move upto 3 despite never batting there for Surrey. The only dilemma is whether Bairstow will keep which allows them to pick Brook over Foakes.

Pope should be used to it, he made his debut for England batting at 4 when batting at 6 for Surrey lol

 

[greenone]

Only Hasan Ali has more div 1 wickets in first class cricket this year than Parkinson yet we go with Leach ?????

No surprises with the batting. Pope will move upto 3 despite never batting there for Surrey. The only dilemma is whether Bairstow will keep which allows them to pick Brook over Foakes.

Bairstow is lucky to be in the squad imo. Gets out bowled/lbw far too often for a test match batsman.

 

[fundy]

Bairstow is lucky to be in the squad imo. Gets out bowled/lbw far too often for a test match batsman.

had his usual preparation of playing a grand total of zero red ball games before the first test too i see

 

[Deleted member 15344]

Only Hasan Ali has more div 1 wickets in first class cricket this year than Parkinson yet we go with Leach ?????

No surprises with the batting. Pope will move upto 3 despite never batting there for Surrey. The only dilemma is whether Bairstow will keep which allows them to pick Brook over Foakes.

I can never understand what they do with Leach - take him when there isn’t going to much for spinner , sit him in a bubble for months with no games , don’t take him to the sub continent ?‍

He has played well in the last couple of CC games but not as well as Parkinson

Interesting choice for the white ball coach

 

[funkycoldmedina]

Some have a pathological hatred on here of Bairstow for no apparent reason. He was our highest run scorer on the last tour. In a team that can't buy a run we can I'll afford to do that. I would love to see Crawley, Brook, Pope et al step up and push him out but they're not. He has a ticker, he's a team man and he delivers more than others. He's not perfect by any means but until better solution comes along he'd be in my team

 

[Junior]

I can never understand what they do with Leach - take him when there isn’t going to much for spinner , sit him in a bubble for months with no games , don’t take him to the sub continent ?‍

He has played well in the last couple of CC games but not as well as Parkinson

Interesting choice for the white ball coach

If you look at his results with the Ozzie ladies team maybe not so much. Listened to a podcast on the way to work and apparently he interviewed brilliantly for the role.

I like the choice. Bold. Would have been easy to stick with Collingwood.

 

[Junior]

Bairstow is lucky to be in the squad imo. Gets out bowled/lbw far too often for a test match batsman.

He was our highest runner scorer on the last tour so I get why he's in. I think they will be desperately trying to get Harry Brook in and Foakes/Bairstowe will be the one to give way.