Search results

It works like this in cricket because the batsman has always been given the benefit of the doubt. This is based on the principle that, a batsman's innings will be over if given out with no second chance to rectify a bad decision, where as the bowler will usually have another chance to get him...

But that's the same margin of error as Hawk-Eye overturning a not-out decision by the umpire. I think.

Maybe I'm just rationalising a reason to keep him in the 11 in hope more than anything. I just watched that compilation now, the ones where it's hitting 2 stumps halfway up are particularly amusing, particularly his indignant face as if Hawk-Eye is some sort of English conspiracy. I think...

I don't know much about the Aussie squad other than the 11 they put out last week, but from TMS discussions it sounds like he's more of a batsman than bowler. Could be that the loss of Starc gives him one more chance at Lords.

They need him as an all rounder/3rd seamer though, don't they?