No. They just need top insist that the Umpires do their job. Like all other Umpires have to

Why is Ali being dissed as a potential 5 when bigger concerns are Hales, Vince & Ballance who have hardly scored a run between them this summer?

ps Ali bats 3 for his county...........

Find some targets worthy of criticism please & be constructive.

Yes.

If the batters score more runs that would be given for a boundary, which included a run still in progress if they have crossed, then those will be scored instead and the batsman stay at the end of the final run.


That would be an overthrow and so the batsman would remain at whichever end they were at at the moment the ball is thrown.

So were they to have run two or four, not crossed attempting of a third or fifth, and the fielder then throws, or just kicks, the ball into the boundary then they would remain at their original end.

If they cross after the field has played at the ball and before it reaches the boundary it does not count. Basically the boundary works the same as if off the bat but instead comes off the fielder, and comes after the runs already scored to determine the batman's ends.


If India win their final two matches they will be number one (114).
If not and Australia win their final match they will be number one (112).
If not and England win or draw their final match they will be number one (112 or 110).
If not and Pakistan win their final match they will be number one (111).

Worst review ever!

New ball does the damage with 2 wickets in Woakes' over

Still advantage Pakistan though at 320-6 with Younus approaching 100

Not according to Ladbrokes. They have England at evens with Pakistan at 7/4

What do they know...

A multi million pound betting outfit against a mug punter like me.....

Lots of dropped chances in the first session. Ones that I expect us to catch more times than not. Cooks decision to bat first turned nasty on him here and the weather has looked lovely for our asian opponents.

The bowlers created the chances but we have to be better than that in the field. If we'd caught those I doubt Pakistan would be level with us today.

Can't understand why fielders are claiming catches that they didn't make

Just happened in the West Indies/ India game

KL Rahul claimed a clean catch when it was quite clear on the replay that he hadn't

As for Yasir yesterday, that was awful as well

No wonder there was a lot of bad feeling this morning when he was at the crease

Didn't see it , but all the comms on TMS mentioned it

Odds are correct would be wrong if Pakistan had a stronger tail or if they lost 1 or 2 less wickets.

Isnt that the same as bowlers doing it ? Which they do all the time. Appeal every time the ball hits the pad or looks close to the bat on the way to the keeper ? Bowlers appealing for wickets they know they havent got

Just wondering about how you would penalise fielding teams for loss of overs during a day when there is a change of innings, which would be most days? Presumably there would have to be a calculation of how many overs should have been bowled between start of play and the fall of the last wicket / declaration?

They take 2 overs off for an innings change

Indeed. And also for rain delays (although they may be made up later). So there would need to be a rigid formula used to track actual overs against required overs taking all these things into accounts. If it encourages spinners being a bigger part of the game than they are now, that has to be a good thing?

They would have to judge the kick as deliberate


They know how much has been bet on each result and work out the odds accordingly

Sri Lanka recovering from a torrid start in the final test v Australia

Chose to bat and were 26/5

96/5 at the moment shortly after lunch and the ball is turning sharply

Be surprised if this makes it to Day 4

No I don't think it is

Appealing because you think it may be out is different from claiming a catch knowing that it has bounced

I am of the opinion that the fielders knew that it had bounced on these 2 occasions

Was chatting last night and this incident came up

Before tv reviews became the norm, most batsmen used to trust the fielder if he had said he'd caught it. Can't remember the name of the Pakistan 'keeper who claimed a catch from Botham who asked him if he caught it and had said yes and just as beefy was heading to the Pavillion , the replay came up on the TV (no screens at the ground in those days) and showed that the keeper had dropped it

Thought for a moment that Botham was going to kill him....

Thank you for that pearl of wisdom

I never knew that

Indeed, but can you kick a ball accidentally? Obviously you can misfield and the ball hit your foot and deflect to the boundary, but that would not be called a kick.

Excellent feature on Sky at the moment with a Curtley Ambrose masterclass

Well worth catching up with

But don't you think bowlers appeal for balls they know full well are not out ? Hence they don't review them. I think it can work with bat, ball or in the field.

No, because they are asking "Is it Out (Howzat) ?" and not stating that it is out as in "Yes , I have caught it cleanly"

To me , there is a big difference between the two

Number 7's going well in the Test matches this week

100's for Wriddhiman Saha for India, Moeen Ali for England and now Dhanajaya de Silva is 80* for Sri Lanka

Yet if the umpire gives it they don't argue. I know what you mean though and agree

Ha. Does he not know you're putting Paddy Powers kids through college ?