Is it just me or does it seem very relaxed out there?
No pressure at all this morning, I know wickets can change all that but the aussies seem very flat and the ball isn't doing anything, barring a poor shot they could actually go on a bit here
Absolutely. Professional sports, especially football, are almost alien to their amateur counterparts. Whole industries have appeared off the back of professional sport - think of all the technology that's been developed to monitor and analyze performance and how far the science has developed...
I'm saying it's not a fair comparison.
In your village games you are playing for your own enjoyment in your spare time, you are paying for the privilege, the umpires are volunteering, there are no cameras, there is no DRS, there is hardly anyone watching. If the majority of people weren't...
That evens up the the missed stumping and the Trott decision from yesterday as far as I'm concerned. Now he just needs to make it count like Agar did.
Terrible sportsmanship, but don't believe for a second that any of the aussie team would've walked in that situation.
Because of the dry pitch and the fact we've got Swann I think.
Personally I think 250 absolute minimum. This run chase will be won/lost in the MIND as much as it will be on the pitch. Whatever the total we'll need a couple of early wickets to get into their heads and make them wobble. Tomorrow...
I often wonder why they call it the 2nd new ball. Surely when you change ball for the first time it's the 1st new ball. The one you start the innings with is just "The ball", calling it the new ball indicates that there's an old one somewhere when we know that's not the case.
I might e-mail sky
I think we're going to need everyone to chip in with a score here. I can't see anyone getting close to 3 figures, especially as the new ball is due soon.
The longer it goes on the more the pitch is going to help Swann, I wouldn't fancy facing him on day 5 on this wicket. Unfortunately I don't...
He's bloody WRONG then isn't he.
There is clear doubt in both cases, you can't argue it both ways so the benefit goes to the bowler in one instance and the batsman in the other. It has to be CONSISTANT.
Can you not see that?
It looked out in real time but the replays showed what looked to be an inside edge.
Personally I thinks it's a disgraceful decision bearing in mind the same umpire gave the benefit of the doubt to the batsman earlier in the game when it looked like an obvious stumping. In this case there was...