Saying that it would have been given not out without technology so one must not complain too much.
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
England v Sri Lanka, First Test, Cardiff
- Thread starter Titanic
- Start date
Saying that it would have been given not out without technology so one must not complain too much.
You can get scenarios where left arm spinners bowl around the wicket to right hand batsman and pitch it into rough and all the batsman does is pad up because he can't be given out LBW because the ball pitches outside the leg stump......inspiring sport.
I refer the honourable gentleman to post 102. Seen it loads of times.
brightonmark1234
Well-known member
rubbish broad bowling
sten_super
Brain Surgeon
I think that's what the rule book says. The UDRS is a bit different because the leeway is given due to the possibility that the technology might be wrong, rather than anything specific in the rule book. If there's less than half a ball on Hawkeye between the ball hitting or not hitting then they are saying that they can't be sure whether the correct decision was made or not (as Hawkeye may err), and as such the ruling on the field stands.
were need another wicket
Broad is pissing Dar off now. He'll give it not out, even if he clean bowls him.
sten_super
Brain Surgeon
But that's because it's a horrendously negative bowling tactic. If you could be out LBW to a ball that pitched outside leg then every slow left armer and leg spinner would pitch it there and hope it turned enough to clip leg stump, as it's harder for the batsman to reach legside than offside. As it is, a bowler pitching outside leg is doing it purely because they don't want runs scored off them, rather than as a legitimate wicket-taking tactic.
It's not when there is a load of rough there on days 4 and 5 which have been caused by right arm seamers from the other end. I have seen many times batsman just pad up because of that and the tactic of the bowlers to try and utilise this rough is negated....this rough actually only comes into play when a leftie is out there, to a right hander batsman it is irrelevant because of this very rule.
In any case going back to my orignal point if the ball is going to crash into the stumps why does it matter whether it hit in line or pitched outside the leg, what a load of old cobblers.
Uncle Buck
Ghost Writer
- Jul 7, 2003
- 28,075
Now seeing the issue of a 4 man attack, Anderson is off, possibly injured, Broad off colour, but the ball too new for the spinners. Really have to go back to a 5 man attack, whilst there is no natural number 7, in Broad, Swann, Bresnan, Shazad and Rashid we have a plethra of number eights and Prior is a number 6.
brightonmark1234
Well-known member
need a wicket
- Thread starter
- #113
Blimey... a bit early for the pre-tea buffet isn't it?
sten_super
Brain Surgeon
But it is a negative tactic for exactly the reason I outline in my original post. If you can pitch the ball anywhere to get an LBW, you are going to aim to keep the ball as far away from the bat as possible, because that gives the batsman the smallest chance of getting bat on ball. Every leggie and slow left armer would, even on day one, pitch it outside leg and hope it will spin in enough to shave leg stump (and the URDS has really benefitted spinners in getting LBW decisions). No doubt fast bowlers would do the same; bowl round the wicket, pitch it outside leg and get it swinging in at pace towards leg stump, as far away from the bat as possible.
- Thread starter
- #116
Trott has only gone and got him RUN OUT backing up! Just got a finger tip on it.
Spawny bugger!
No it won't the aim of the bowler is not to pitch the ball as far away from the batsman as he can, it is to try and get his wicket. If I was a bowler I would be looking to clip the top of off stump, not pitch it miles outside leg, as you seem to imply. Just because the LBW rule has been changed doesn't mean to say bowlers will do anything differently, they will still try and clip the off stump because that is the place least protected by the bat (and leg).
brightonmark1234
Well-known member
in the slip slip cordon can we close it up
Uncle Buck
Ghost Writer
- Jul 7, 2003
- 28,075
Trott rather than Swann or even Pietersen?