[Cricket] England vs Australia Third Ashes Test - Leeds 22nd-26th August 2019

[Bold Seagull]

Agreed. Ponting wasn't sure when he watched it live. I've seen the replay several times, and it's really tough to see at full speed, as it seems to clip the front pad just after pitching, still a long way from the stumps.

That's interesting, as it would suggest that ball tracking doesn't work.

I think a lot of people in cricket know that the less travel the ball has between pitching and impact, the less reliable the technology is, even the makers of which admit.

https://www.smh.com.au/sport/cricket/ben-stokes-was-out-or-was-he-20190827-p52lbo.html

 

[Triggaaar]

I think a lot of people in cricket know that the less travel the ball has between pitching and impact, the less reliable the technology is, even the makers of which admit.

Watching the replays, with the ball tracking shown up until it hits Stokes's pad, I imagine it would have gone on to hit the stumps. But just watching it live, with the camera at the non-strikers end, I just can't tell. Although it looks like not out was the wrong decision, it doesn't look like it was a bad decision. And nothing like some of the farcical decisions we've had this series. And not as bad as the decision to review the decision a few balls earlier.

 

[The Wizard]

What is that article on about It looks absolutely plum no matter how you see it, it’s not going to have turned enough to miss the stumps and you can already see it straighten off the pitch, so regardless of DRS being fallable when the ball hits the pad close to the pitch of the ball, it’s absolutely plum. The only reason I can I think umpire Wilson, who has given 15 wrong decisions in two games, didn’t give that is because at full speed it looks as though because of the way stokes finishes that it may have been down the leg side or he wasn’t sure where it struck him in which case he made the right call to give not out. Either that or a small part of him wanted Stokes to make history

It was a horrendous call from the umpire, regardless of DRS. In fact the standard of umpiring from Wilson especially has been unbelievably bad. The way he shook his head immediately makes you think that he thought there was something clear in order to not give that out.

 

[Sussex Nomad]

I think you're all wrong and the umpire didn't give it because everyone hates the Aussies.

 

[Easy 10]

They dropped him and then fumbled a simple run-out opportunity, so they had plenty of chances to win that test before that iffy umpire call. THEY screwed up. Wonderfully.

 

[Triggaaar]

It was a horrendous call from the umpire

I disagree.

In fact the standard of umpiring from Wilson especially has been unbelievably bad.

This lbw aside, I agree.

 

[Bold Seagull]

What is that article on about It looks absolutely plum no matter how you see it, it’s not going to have turned enough to miss the stumps and you can already see it straighten off the pitch, so regardless of DRS being fallable when the ball hits the pad close to the pitch of the ball, it’s absolutely plum. The only reason I can I think umpire Wilson, who has given 15 wrong decisions in two games, didn’t give that is because at full speed it looks as though because of the way stokes finishes that it may have been down the leg side or he wasn’t sure where it struck him in which case he made the right call to give not out. Either that or a small part of him wanted Stokes to make history

It was a horrendous call from the umpire, regardless of DRS. In fact the standard of umpiring from Wilson especially has been unbelievably bad. The way he shook his head immediately makes you think that he thought there was something clear in order to not give that out.

What do you mean 'turn enough to miss the stumps' if it doesn't turn it's going to miss by a mile! Lyon is bowling right arm over the wicket to a left hander, so the only way it can pitch around leg stump and hit the stumps is if it has turned or really straightened up. Straight on after pitching and it's missing. If it straightens up it clips leg, DRS has predicted a lot of turn for it to clip middle stump.

 

[Eeyore]

When is the team for the 4th test due to be announced?

It's Ben Stokes, Jofra Archer and nine others.

 

[The Wizard]

I disagree.
This lbw aside, I agree.

The only excuse he has is that at full speed it didn’t look as obvious, but IMO that doesn’t excuse him he’s a cricket umpire they are paid professionals who should be the best in the world at what they do. I’d love to know what his reason was for giving not out, he gave a very certain head shake very quickly so he must have been pretty sure.

Watching it at full speed I think his only possible reasoning could be that he thought it was going down because of where Stokes ended up, but to me that’s not an excuse for a pro umpire.

 

[The Wizard]

What do you mean 'turn enough to miss the stumps' if it doesn't turn it's going to miss by a mile! Lyon is bowling right arm over the wicket to a left hander, so the only way it can pitch around leg stump and hit the stumps is if it has turned or really straightened up. Straight on after pitching and it's missing. If it straightens up it clips leg, DRS has predicted a lot of turn for it to clip middle stump.

There’s no way that ball from impact point is missing the stumps unless he’s literally bowled a straight ball with no spin, you can see after it’s pitched it’s turned inwards as you would expect from someone like Lyon, it hasn’t exactly turned round a corner has it?

 

[dazzer6666]

What is that article on about It looks absolutely plum no matter how you see it, it’s not going to have turned enough to miss the stumps and you can already see it straighten off the pitch, so regardless of DRS being fallable when the ball hits the pad close to the pitch of the ball, it’s absolutely plum. The only reason I can I think umpire Wilson, who has given 15 wrong decisions in two games, didn’t give that is because at full speed it looks as though because of the way stokes finishes that it may have been down the leg side or he wasn’t sure where it struck him in which case he made the right call to give not out. Either that or a small part of him wanted Stokes to make history

It was a horrendous call from the umpire, regardless of DRS. In fact the standard of umpiring from Wilson especially has been unbelievably bad. The way he shook his head immediately makes you think that he thought there was something clear in order to not give that out.

Not for me. I thought it looked to be sliding down the leg side, particularly in real time. For me it was the flick off the front pad that straightened it up into the stumps (there is no way the line shown on hawkeye was the line the ball was travelling without that flick) which Hawkeye seems to have taken as the line for the DRS ‘three reds’. I don’t think it was a bad decision at all, but one of those (thankfully rare) examples where the technology isn’t 100% reliable.

 

[Eeyore]

Yes, the aforementioned 79/80 series was just after the 78/79 series. Australia played both England and the Windies over 6 tests, They played two series in successive years as the Packer players had returned to the fold. That's why England won 5-1 in 78/79 and lost 3-0 a year later - having Lillee, Thomson, Chappell and Marsh back made a difference ... who knew?

You can tell that one of my specialist subjects for Mastermind was The Ashes ... I wasn't allowed to choose it though

1) Which batsman was dropped for Leeds in 1981 to make way for Brearley to captain ?

2) Where and when was the highest successful run chase in the history of the Ashes ?

3) Who took England's last Ashes hat trick ?

Off the top of me 'ead those ones.

 

[Mellotron]

I always find “you wouldn’t have won without X” arguments really dumb and facile.

Same argument people are making about them and Steve Smith, but they DO have him, so they DID deserve to win the First Test.

Ben Stokes plays for England and it’s ridiculous to suggest his knock wasn’t worthy of winning that match. Ergo, England deserved to win the Third Test.

 

[Bold Seagull]

There’s no way that ball from impact point is missing the stumps unless he’s literally bowled a straight ball with no spin, you can see after it’s pitched it’s turned inwards as you would expect from someone like Lyon, it hasn’t exactly turned round a corner has it?View attachment 114763

Well, I think your misreading the release of the ball. Lyon's arm on release is well wide of the stumps at the other end, so for it to pitch in line with leg, then turn to clip middle, that is a lot of turn. That same trajectory if he was right arm over the wicket to a right hander would look a lot bigger especially on how the graphic works, it would be pitching well outside off and hitting the middle of the stumps. Both Stokes and Wilson felt it wasn't turning. It's an interesting debate because we trust the technology implicitly but even Ponting on commentary said, looks like it could be missing leg stump.

 

[Bold Seagull]

Not for me. I thought it looked to be sliding down the leg side, particularly in real time. For me it was the flick off the front pad that straightened it up into the stumps (there is no way the line shown on hawkeye was the line the ball was travelling without that flick) which Hawkeye seems to have taken as the line for the DRS ‘three reds’. I don’t think it was a bad decision at all, but one of those (thankfully rare) examples where the technology isn’t 100% reliable.

What the DRS graphic doesn't show is how far wide the bowlers arm is when releasing the ball. Anyone who has batted knows the difference when a bowler decides to switch from around the wicket to over it. For Lyon to go around the wicket pitch on leg and get a left hander LBW, that is a lot of turn.

 

[Triggaaar]

Smith's comments about facing Archer in the next test:
“If they’re bowling up there it means they can’t nick me off, or hit me on the pad or hit the stumps. With the Dukes ball – I don’t know, that’s an interesting ploy.”

The lady doth protest too much, methinks.

 

[Bold Seagull]

1) Which batsman was dropped for Leeds in 1981 to make way for Brearley to captain ?

2) Where and when was the highest successful run chase in the history of the Ashes ?

3) Who took England's last Ashes hat trick ?

Off the top of me 'ead those ones.

1. Bob Woolmer
2. Dunno
3. Stuart Broad? X

edit - wrong...

 

[dazzer6666]

1) Which batsman was dropped for Leeds in 1981 to make way for Brearley to captain ?

2) Where and when was the highest successful run chase in the history of the Ashes ?

3) Who took England's last Ashes hat trick ?

Off the top of me 'ead those ones.

Ok, so in the spirit off the top of me ‘ead.....

1. Bob Woolmer
2. Australia’s 400-odd in about 1948 (also Headingley)
3. Goughie ?

 

[Triggaaar]

1) Which batsman was dropped for Leeds in 1981 to make way for Brearley to captain ?

2) Where and when was the highest successful run chase in the history of the Ashes ?

3) Who took England's last Ashes hat trick ?

1) No idea
2) No idea
3) Gough?

 

[Kalimantan Gull]

There’s no way that ball from impact point is missing the stumps unless he’s literally bowled a straight ball with no spin, you can see after it’s pitched it’s turned inwards as you would expect from someone like Lyon, it hasn’t exactly turned round a corner has it?View attachment 114763

Well, you originally said if the ball didn't turn, then it wouldn't have hit the stumps. Now you're saying from impact point, so after its turned, and you may well be right there. The image still shows some deviation after impact, however, which is very weird - and wouldn't have happened - possibly because the DRS has ignored it clipping of the front pad and is basing it on impact on the back pad.

This could well have been 'umpires call', and not smashing the stumps