| My irony meter just exploded... 10:37 - Mar 14 with 764 views | Zx1988 |
|  |
| |  |
| My irony meter just exploded... on 11:18 - Mar 14 with 550 views | stonojnr |
I dont think its the same as the Bairstow one, because if Carey hadnt caught the ball then Bairstow would have happily taken the byes for it whether the ball went to the boundary or not or if Carey misses the wicket and the ball scoohes out to mid on/off, so the ball isnt dead just because its passed his ear, and he doesnt know where the ball is because he just wandered off from the crease before the umpire called the over, and something the Aussies had picked up that England do alot.
this one first of all the bowler obstructs the batsman from making the crease, so that should automatically have meant it was dead ball situation and actually penalty runs awarded to Pakistan.
secondly the batsman isnt trying to run, infact hes trying to pick up the ball, now again if the ball was considered live (and I dont believe it was I think it should be considered dead in this situation) then the batsman doing that with his hands would be obstructing the fielding team and could be given out for it, because no doubt Bangladesh would claim they werent giving permission for him to do that.
lastly its the friggin captain of Bangladesh doing this, not some wet behind the ears junior in his first game, show abit more class captain.
now we dont know in the context of the game whether Pakistan had spent all game trying to steal a run from the bowlers end, but I bet they made sure none of the Bangladesh players could venture out of the crease at all in their innings and I bet they celeberated right under Mirazs nose when they got his wicket for just the 1 run.
so I think its absolutely fair for any cricket fan to label that pathetic cricket from Bangladesh. | | | |
| My irony meter just exploded... on 11:35 - Mar 14 with 499 views | Guthrum |
| My irony meter just exploded... on 11:18 - Mar 14 by stonojnr |
I dont think its the same as the Bairstow one, because if Carey hadnt caught the ball then Bairstow would have happily taken the byes for it whether the ball went to the boundary or not or if Carey misses the wicket and the ball scoohes out to mid on/off, so the ball isnt dead just because its passed his ear, and he doesnt know where the ball is because he just wandered off from the crease before the umpire called the over, and something the Aussies had picked up that England do alot.
this one first of all the bowler obstructs the batsman from making the crease, so that should automatically have meant it was dead ball situation and actually penalty runs awarded to Pakistan.
secondly the batsman isnt trying to run, infact hes trying to pick up the ball, now again if the ball was considered live (and I dont believe it was I think it should be considered dead in this situation) then the batsman doing that with his hands would be obstructing the fielding team and could be given out for it, because no doubt Bangladesh would claim they werent giving permission for him to do that.
lastly its the friggin captain of Bangladesh doing this, not some wet behind the ears junior in his first game, show abit more class captain.
now we dont know in the context of the game whether Pakistan had spent all game trying to steal a run from the bowlers end, but I bet they made sure none of the Bangladesh players could venture out of the crease at all in their innings and I bet they celeberated right under Mirazs nose when they got his wicket for just the 1 run.
so I think its absolutely fair for any cricket fan to label that pathetic cricket from Bangladesh. |
I'd have said the primary fault was the Pakistan batter deliberately interfering with the fielding side and attempting to pick up the ball, which prevented the chance of a run out in the first instance.
In terms of preventing the batter from getting back into his crease, it is the duty of batters to run around the fielding side, there is no obligation for the latter to get out of their way. In any case, he wasn't trying to, but was intent on interfering with a ball which was not yet dead, obstructing the fielder in doing so. No idea what he was thinking, probably deserved to be out, even if not a dismissable offence.
Edit: Mind you, I was always a terrible umpire. [Post edited 14 Mar 11:35]
|  |
| |
| My irony meter just exploded... on 11:48 - Mar 14 with 457 views | Camul123 |
| My irony meter just exploded... on 11:35 - Mar 14 by Guthrum |
I'd have said the primary fault was the Pakistan batter deliberately interfering with the fielding side and attempting to pick up the ball, which prevented the chance of a run out in the first instance.
In terms of preventing the batter from getting back into his crease, it is the duty of batters to run around the fielding side, there is no obligation for the latter to get out of their way. In any case, he wasn't trying to, but was intent on interfering with a ball which was not yet dead, obstructing the fielder in doing so. No idea what he was thinking, probably deserved to be out, even if not a dismissable offence.
Edit: Mind you, I was always a terrible umpire. [Post edited 14 Mar 11:35]
|
Agreed. Extremely dozy batting. Out every time. | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
