Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
England Cricket 2021 (excluding Ashes)
Comments
-
My turn to have a moan.
There is bright sunshine right now. Almost the whole of Lord's is bathed in beautiful, warm, late-Summer sunshine. Direct sunlight kissing the immaculate greensward.
Except for a huge, dark shadow, cast directly on the pitch, from a floodlight pylon which has been raised, but not turned on. In short, the floodlights are making the light much worse.1 -
England could have had a go at it I thought. Then I thought about the batting line up and changed my mind.1
-
Chizz said:My turn to have a moan.
There is bright sunshine right now. Almost the whole of Lord's is bathed in beautiful, warm, late-Summer sunshine. Direct sunlight kissing the immaculate greensward.
Except for a huge, dark shadow, cast directly on the pitch, from a floodlight pylon which has been raised, but not turned on. In short, the floodlights are making the light much worse.
Summer has only just begun.0 -
Ollie Robinson suspended from international cricket pending investigation into his historic tweets2
-
The tweets were undoubtedly stupid, but they were a long time ago. Suspending him seems incredibly harsh to meMrOneLung said:Ollie Robinson suspended from international cricket pending investigation into his historic tweets11 -
I agree. Only in England can we unearth a fast bowler who had just taken 7 wickets in the match (for very few runs) and then suspend him for something he said a few years ago.Gravesend_Addick said:
The tweets were undoubtedly stupid, but they were a long time ago. Suspending him seems incredibly harsh to meMrOneLung said:Ollie Robinson suspended from international cricket pending investigation into his historic tweets
Madness.5 -
investigate what? He did it, he admitted it and apologised!
either ban him or fine him and move on5 -
I disagree that it’s harsh, but I do agree they were a long time ago when he was practically just a kid. I just think doing nothing or just giving him a fine sends the wrong message. I hope Robinson understands why it’s necessary for him to be suspended from selection.Gravesend_Addick said:
The tweets were undoubtedly stupid, but they were a long time ago. Suspending him seems incredibly harsh to meMrOneLung said:Ollie Robinson suspended from international cricket pending investigation into his historic tweets1 -
Think yesterday was a day made for buttler and stokes, if they were in the team I’d reckon New Zealand wouldn’t have declared when they did or we would have given it a right good go. Apart from root, almost by design there’s no one who can really push on the accelerator.0
-
kentaddick said:Think yesterday was a day made for buttler and stokes, if they were in the team I’d reckon New Zealand wouldn’t have declared when they did or we would have given it a right good go. Apart from root, almost by design there’s no one who can really push on the accelerator.
I am not so sure, I love the way New Zealand play cricket, with Buttler and Stokes in our team, it could have been a great afternoon, I think England should have had a go at it anyway, the crowd deserve entertainment.0 - Sponsored links:
-
From what I saw, chasing that total would have been very risky. The ball was swinging and bounce was variable with one or two nasties; wickets would almost certainly have tumbled. NZ knew that it was a tough target when they declared. It was a decent declaration but not particularly generous. If we'd had Buttler and Stokes in the team, Williamson would have set the target just a bit higher. The fact of the matter is that the weather spoilt the game; that's nobody's fault. I don't blame England for not chasing it unless NZ fed us some runs.Johnnysummers5 said:kentaddick said:Think yesterday was a day made for buttler and stokes, if they were in the team I’d reckon New Zealand wouldn’t have declared when they did or we would have given it a right good go. Apart from root, almost by design there’s no one who can really push on the accelerator.
I am not so sure, I love the way New Zealand play cricket, with Buttler and Stokes in our team, it could have been a great afternoon, I think England should have had a go at it anyway, the crowd deserve entertainment.2 -
Crawley and Lawrence can be almost as destructive as Stokes and Buttler3
-
I can't recall the exact score at the point, but it was obvious what was needed was well below what you see in T20 nowadays with 49 overs to get the runs rather than 20. The problem was we didn't have the players to do this with no Butler, Stokes or Bairstow.kentaddick said:Think yesterday was a day made for buttler and stokes, if they were in the team I’d reckon New Zealand wouldn’t have declared when they did or we would have given it a right good go. Apart from root, almost by design there’s no one who can really push on the accelerator.0 -
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/57383097
The Culture Secretary has criticised the decision to suspend Robinson
4 -
I remember when Dowden was a liberal member of the Cameron backroom staff, and not this venal culture warrior.2
-
Oh god, the ECB's crass decision is rousing up the culture war types. Not handled well. Robinson shouldn't have been dropped, he should have been made to do some coaching days with Asian and women's clubs in between Tests2
-
Then when asked how it went he'll say it was ok but those woman can't throw properly.4
-
Or given the chance to apologise and say they don't reflect his views now and that be the end of it.1
-
It's difficult for the Minister for Culture, Media and Sport, because he has absolutely nothing else to comment on right now, other than to decry a sport's governing body acting quickly and decisively to determine suitable punishment for one of its high-profile employees.killerandflash said:https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/57383097
The Culture Secretary has criticised the decision to suspend Robinson
Wait, what?
0 - Sponsored links:
-
Boris now getting involved FFS.
Whether the ECB are right or wrong on Robinson (and as above I think its a bit daft to ban someone for something done years back as a teenager if they have learnt, grown, and changed as a person since), politicians can do one trying to use it as a cheap way to rabble rouse.
7 -
TBH I see this as the ECB wanting to be seen to be doing something and covering their arses because their media and comms team should have been all over this when he got his first call up a year ago.1
-
I agree, it's having to be seen to do something as to not undermine the anti-racism messages.cantersaddick said:TBH I see this as the ECB wanting to be seen to be doing something and covering their arses because their media and comms team should have been all over this when he got his first call up a year ago.
Robinson must be pretty thick not to have gone back and deleted them too, was a problem waiting to happen.0 -
Question for students of the game.Law 41.7.1 Any delivery, which passes or would have passed, without pitching, above waist height of the striker standing upright at the popping crease, is unfair. Whenever such a delivery is bowled, the umpire shall call and signal No ball.
Why do the umpires (usually the square leg umpire) 'guess' whether the ball would have passed above waist height of the striker, when the DRS ball tracking would be able to tell them precisely, accurately and without question? Each player's waist height could be calibrated pre-match, so as to avoid any guessing whatsoever.0 -
He's not been banned, just suspended pending an investigation. With the next test starting Thursday, you cannot pick him in case the findings go against him and the squad would be short. As to the question of investigating what it's whether he was under contract when he made those tweets. if he was, then one committee will review it and if not another will, so it's a bit complicated as he may have been between Kent and Yorkshire contracts at the time.
The implications are that if he made those tweets under contract, why were they not dealt with at the time?
He's been made to look a fool, and a very silly boy, and will now have many aspiring young cricketers going back over old tweets and Fb posts deleting stuff I expect.1 -
Hands up all those who would wish to be judged, as adults, by things they said when they were 18.9
-
It's not a guess, it is "in their opinion" which is all that matters. And it is the bowler's end umpire who makes the call (although often with the confirmation or advice of square leg).Chizz said:Question for students of the game.Law 41.7.1 Any delivery, which passes or would have passed, without pitching, above waist height of the striker standing upright at the popping crease, is unfair. Whenever such a delivery is bowled, the umpire shall call and signal No ball.
Why do the umpires (usually the square leg umpire) 'guess' whether the ball would have passed above waist height of the striker, when the DRS ball tracking would be able to tell them precisely, accurately and without question? Each player's waist height could be calibrated pre-match, so as to avoid any guessing whatsoever.
The "waist" has been lowered recently - it used to be belly button, but is now trouser tops. :-)1 -
Similar thread on Betfair and someone made this point.
Few years ago they had bikini clad dancers on the boundary who celebrated every four or six.
Is the person who sanctioned this still at the ECB, if so has he been reprimanded for it?
2 -
'In their opinion' is not part of Law 41.7.1. Often, when there's a full toss that is roughly waist height, they go to a DRS camera angle, but with no supporting ball-tracking data. The question is, why not?Pedro45 said:
It's not a guess, it is "in their opinion" which is all that matters. And it is the bowler's end umpire who makes the call (although often with the confirmation or advice of square leg).Chizz said:Question for students of the game.Law 41.7.1 Any delivery, which passes or would have passed, without pitching, above waist height of the striker standing upright at the popping crease, is unfair. Whenever such a delivery is bowled, the umpire shall call and signal No ball.
Why do the umpires (usually the square leg umpire) 'guess' whether the ball would have passed above waist height of the striker, when the DRS ball tracking would be able to tell them precisely, accurately and without question? Each player's waist height could be calibrated pre-match, so as to avoid any guessing whatsoever.
The "waist" has been lowered recently - it used to be belly button, but is now trouser tops. :-)0 -
Big disadvantage for those people who walk round with their trousers below their pants...Pedro45 said:
It's not a guess, it is "in their opinion" which is all that matters. And it is the bowler's end umpire who makes the call (although often with the confirmation or advice of square leg).Chizz said:Question for students of the game.Law 41.7.1 Any delivery, which passes or would have passed, without pitching, above waist height of the striker standing upright at the popping crease, is unfair. Whenever such a delivery is bowled, the umpire shall call and signal No ball.
Why do the umpires (usually the square leg umpire) 'guess' whether the ball would have passed above waist height of the striker, when the DRS ball tracking would be able to tell them precisely, accurately and without question? Each player's waist height could be calibrated pre-match, so as to avoid any guessing whatsoever.
The "waist" has been lowered recently - it used to be belly button, but is now trouser tops. :-)2
