It is what's in the book that counts but Elgar didn't nick it - the "spike", if you can call it that, coincides with Elgar's elbow hitting his pad as he plays the ball.
Had Elgar been given "not out" by the Umpire then he would still be at the crease for the same reason he isn't batting now - the 3rd Umpire has to be given proof that the standing Umpire has made a clear and obvious error The "murmur" would be justification to stand by the decision.
Still - excellent news that Denly is our most successful bowler in this innings if you are a Kent supporter but not so if you are an England fan because we don't look like taking a wicket!
a word about the commentary team on Talksport .. far superior to the worn out and knackered bunch we are saddled with on Test Match Special .. Mark Butcher has developed into a top class ball by ball caller alongside the experienced SAfrican Neil Manthorp with very good and perceptive analysis from Steve Harmison, Darren Gough, Mark Nicholas and the occasional insight from (yes love or hate him) Kevin Pietersen. Such a relief from the self obsessed arrogance of 'Aggers' and the stupid schoolboy gigglings of 'Tuffers' and the new commentator whose name I can't recall, not the female, the other one ((:>)
It is what's in the book that counts but Elgar didn't nick it - the "spike", if you can call it that, coincides with Elgar's elbow hitting his pad as he plays the ball.
Had Elgar been given "not out" by the Umpire then he would still be at the crease for the same reason he isn't batting now - the 3rd Umpire has to be given proof that the standing Umpire has made a clear and obvious error The "murmur" would be justification to stand by the decision.
Still - excellent news that Denly is our most successful bowler in this innings if you are a Kent supporter but not so if you are an England fan because we don't look like taking a wicket!
I disagree with you. He nicked it, very, very faintly. The spike coincides with the two split-screen images, both of which show no gap between the bat and the ball.
Now, if there's a spike, the front-on camera can't discern a gap, the square-on camera can't detect a gap and the spike is perfectly synchronised with the image, in my view, that's out. It doesn't matter how "high" the spike is (despite the claims of the idiot South African commentator's claims that it should).
In all likelihood, the skin of the batsman's elbow brushing against the soft covering of the pad would not create a "spike", but a longer "murmur". If it were picked up, it would look different.
The umpire gave it out. I believe that Elgar doesn't think he hit it; and, as such, he was perfectly within his rights to review the decision. The TV umpire had not reason at all to overturn the umpire's decision.
(I also disagree that, had the umpire given it not out and Root reviewed that decision, that the TV umpire would not have overturned it. I think it was out, whatever the decision on field).
DRS is a million times better in cricket than VAR in football (as anyone with any sense was saying prior to VAR's introduction. I think this incident proves that it works.
As an aside, I think Root deserves congratulations for bowling Denly at Elgar. Not many people would have known, but Dean Elgar has faced nearly 8,000 balls in Test cricket, but prior to today had only faced 106 balls from legspinners in his 104 Test innings. I think Root pulled off a brilliant trick with that dismissal.
It is what's in the book that counts but Elgar didn't nick it - the "spike", if you can call it that, coincides with Elgar's elbow hitting his pad as he plays the ball.
Had Elgar been given "not out" by the Umpire then he would still be at the crease for the same reason he isn't batting now - the 3rd Umpire has to be given proof that the standing Umpire has made a clear and obvious error The "murmur" would be justification to stand by the decision.
Still - excellent news that Denly is our most successful bowler in this innings if you are a Kent supporter but not so if you are an England fan because we don't look like taking a wicket!
I disagree with you. He nicked it, very, very faintly. The spike coincides with the two split-screen images, both of which show no gap between the bat and the ball.
Now, if there's a spike, the front-on camera can't discern a gap, the square-on camera can't detect a gap and the spike is perfectly synchronised with the image, in my view, that's out. It doesn't matter how "high" the spike is (despite the claims of the idiot South African commentator's claims that it should).
In all likelihood, the skin of the batsman's elbow brushing against the soft covering of the pad would not create a "spike", but a longer "murmur". If it were picked up, it would look different.
The umpire gave it out. I believe that Elgar doesn't think he hit it; and, as such, he was perfectly within his rights to review the decision. The TV umpire had not reason at all to overturn the umpire's decision.
(I also disagree that, had the umpire given it not out and Root reviewed that decision, that the TV umpire would not have overturned it. I think it was out, whatever the decision on field).
DRS is a million times better in cricket than VAR in football (as anyone with any sense was saying prior to VAR's introduction. I think this incident proves that it works.
As an aside, I think Root deserves congratulations for bowling Denly at Elgar. Not many people would have known, but Dean Elgar has faced nearly 8,000 balls in Test cricket, but prior to today had only faced 106 balls from legspinners in his 104 Test innings. I think Root pulled off a brilliant trick with that dismissal.
There have been a number of occasions when a so called "spike" of this nature has been recorded and an Umpire's "not out" decision has not been overturned simply because the noise can be anything including a boot stud on the ground. And invariably in these instances there is no "hot spot" either. There were also equally less than significant "spikes" after the ball had passed the bat and there is nothing identifiable to explain those either.
We have a tolerance when a ball strikes the stumps for an LBW and when a ball pitches outside leg stump because the technology is deemed not accurate enough to be definitive. This isn't definitive either and therefore, at the very least, we should stick with the on field Umpire's decision. Which was "out" in this instance.
you don't like his style of commentary or the way he comes across, that's fair enough, but to call a commentator a wanker is extremely childish and crude. To call someone that, where I come from is called a 'punch on the nose' comment .. should he ever meet you (very unlikely) and should he be aware of your comments, beware of being smacked on the hooter
It is what's in the book that counts but Elgar didn't nick it - the "spike", if you can call it that, coincides with Elgar's elbow hitting his pad as he plays the ball.
Had Elgar been given "not out" by the Umpire then he would still be at the crease for the same reason he isn't batting now - the 3rd Umpire has to be given proof that the standing Umpire has made a clear and obvious error The "murmur" would be justification to stand by the decision.
Still - excellent news that Denly is our most successful bowler in this innings if you are a Kent supporter but not so if you are an England fan because we don't look like taking a wicket!
As an aside, I think Root deserves congratulations for bowling Denly at Elgar. Not many people would have known, but Dean Elgar has faced nearly 8,000 balls in Test cricket, but prior to today had only faced 106 balls from legspinners in his 104 Test innings. I think Root pulled off a brilliant trick with that dismissal.
I've always thought Denly has been slightly underbowled in Test cricket, seeing that his bowling was part of the reason he was called up in the first place
you don't like his style of commentary or the way he comes across, that's fair enough, but to call a commentator a wanker is extremely childish and crude. To call someone that, where I come from is called a 'punch on the nose' comment .. should he ever meet you (very unlikely) and should he be aware of your comments, beware of being smacked on the hooter
Hold on hold on I’m a wanker , doesn’t make me a bad guy . let him who is without wank cast the first bone
As this has turned into the" is mark Nicholas a wanker or not thread" ..I'd just like to say I have met him albeit briefly and he's alright ish but not wanker proportions ..for an average county cricketer he has made a damn good career out of broadcasting/journalism .He does come across as a bit smug/pompous though.
Just like to add I think KP has been a delight on sky..
As this has turned into the" is mark Nicholas a wanker or not thread" ..I'd just like to say I have met him albeit briefly and he's alright ish but not wanker proportions ..for an average county cricketer he has made a damn good career out of broadcasting/journalism .He does come across as a bit smug/pompous though.
Just like to add I think KP has been a delight on sky..
Nicholas may have been an "average county cricketer" but he had enough about him to captain Hampshire for about ten years until he retired and led them to a few trophies.
Which one of you rubbished Sibley after one innings and said we needed to look elsewhere? Bet you're feeling stupid now
I certainly questioned his technique and long may his form continue. I was also someone who thought he should have been given a chance in front of some of the more "favoured" ones though.
Sibley might just be a Graeme Smith who played everything through leg too. Sincerely hope he is but it will be interesting to see how he copes against a Starc bowling across him and a top spinner such as Lyon (just had match figures against NZ of 63.5-19-134-10) on a bunsen burner. It he has a weakness they will find it.
The biggest thing that Sibley does have going for him is his level of concentration and he proved that from the very start of his professional career when he scored that double hundred against Yorkshire for Surrey at the age of 18. That will take him a long way and is something that someone like Joe Denly could learn from specifically in relation to shot selection when you think you're "in".
There's a bloke called, now what's his name, oh yes Steve Smith. He heavily favours the on side and hasn't done too badly.
As this has turned into the" is mark Nicholas a wanker or not thread" ..I'd just like to say I have met him albeit briefly and he's alright ish but not wanker proportions ..for an average county cricketer he has made a damn good career out of broadcasting/journalism .He does come across as a bit smug/pompous though.
Just like to add I think KP has been a delight on sky..
Nicholas may have been an "average county cricketer" but he had enough about him to captain Hampshire for about ten years until he retired and led them to a few trophies.
Comments
Had Elgar been given "not out" by the Umpire then he would still be at the crease for the same reason he isn't batting now - the 3rd Umpire has to be given proof that the standing Umpire has made a clear and obvious error The "murmur" would be justification to stand by the decision.
Still - excellent news that Denly is our most successful bowler in this innings if you are a Kent supporter but not so if you are an England fan because we don't look like taking a wicket!
But the 2nd new ball tomorrow will decide the outcome of this test.
Such a relief from the self obsessed arrogance of 'Aggers' and the stupid schoolboy gigglings of 'Tuffers' and the new commentator whose name I can't recall, not the female, the other one ((:>)
🤣🤣🤣
Now, if there's a spike, the front-on camera can't discern a gap, the square-on camera can't detect a gap and the spike is perfectly synchronised with the image, in my view, that's out. It doesn't matter how "high" the spike is (despite the claims of the idiot South African commentator's claims that it should).
In all likelihood, the skin of the batsman's elbow brushing against the soft covering of the pad would not create a "spike", but a longer "murmur". If it were picked up, it would look different.
The umpire gave it out. I believe that Elgar doesn't think he hit it; and, as such, he was perfectly within his rights to review the decision. The TV umpire had not reason at all to overturn the umpire's decision.
(I also disagree that, had the umpire given it not out and Root reviewed that decision, that the TV umpire would not have overturned it. I think it was out, whatever the decision on field).
DRS is a million times better in cricket than VAR in football (as anyone with any sense was saying prior to VAR's introduction. I think this incident proves that it works.
As an aside, I think Root deserves congratulations for bowling Denly at Elgar. Not many people would have known, but Dean Elgar has faced nearly 8,000 balls in Test cricket, but prior to today had only faced 106 balls from legspinners in his 104 Test innings. I think Root pulled off a brilliant trick with that dismissal.
There have been a number of occasions when a so called "spike" of this nature has been recorded and an Umpire's "not out" decision has not been overturned simply because the noise can be anything including a boot stud on the ground. And invariably in these instances there is no "hot spot" either. There were also equally less than significant "spikes" after the ball had passed the bat and there is nothing identifiable to explain those either.
We have a tolerance when a ball strikes the stumps for an LBW and when a ball pitches outside leg stump because the technology is deemed not accurate enough to be definitive. This isn't definitive either and therefore, at the very least, we should stick with the on field Umpire's decision. Which was "out" in this instance.
Mark Nicholas. Wanker.
:-)
let him who is without wank cast the first bone
He aint heavy
Just like to add I think KP has been a delight on sky..
He heavily favours the on side and hasn't done too badly.