The Ashes 2023

[Malinga the Swinga]

Just now, Mikey1874 said:

Great game.

 

Well done Scotland.

The turning point of match was in 18th over when Currie turned 6 into a dot ball. 

Who would have thought a 2 week cricket tournament in Scotland would see only 2 games unplayed out of over 20.

We even had sun for last games.

[Mikey1874]

Player of tournament is Richie Berrington.

[Malinga the Swinga]

When Sole comes back in to team, we will have good attack but couple of players need to get fitter 

Hopefully players kick on and get picked up, like Sole, by T20 franchises around world.

[New Town Loafer]

5th test finely poised. Would have been so good had it been 2-2 coming into this one. 

[Malinga the Swinga]

Forecast crap for for Sunday/Monday.

Chief cheerleader Vaughan says England were magnificent, England were fantastic and England were brilliant.

Meanwhile Australian last 3 wickets scored enough to get a lead. As for run out, the bail isn't off so tough.

[Mikey1874]

3 hours ago, Footballfirst said:

A Bairstow mistake with the gloves once again as Steve Smith was reprieved from being run out, because the keeper had dislodged a bail just before the ball was in his hands.

 

That was out. The keeper moved the bail but technically it wasn't dislodged as part of it was still on the holding. People afterwards looked up the rules. 

A poor decision. I never get too perturbed by these things because you don't really know what would happen next but at the time it definitely helped Australia.

 

What didn't help Australia was their negativity this morning. If Australia win this and win the series all will be well. But if they lose this test there will be a lot of questions about the captaincy and approach. Similar happened in 2019. 

 

[Malinga the Swinga]

12 minutes ago, Mikey1874 said:

 

That was out. The keeper moved the bail but technically it wasn't dislodged as part of it was still on the holding. People afterwards looked up the rules. 

A poor decision. I never get too perturbed by these things because you don't really know what would happen next but at the time it definitely helped Australia.

 

What didn't help Australia was their negativity this morning. If Australia win this and win the series all will be well. But if they lose this test there will be a lot of questions about the captaincy and approach. Similar happened in 2019. 

 

The run out/ non run out was discussed but the horrendous lbw decision in favour of English not mentioned. That definitely helped England as did the decision not to give Stokes lbw in earlier tests and the catch Cummings took that was given not out.

England have enjoyed overwhelming majority of decisions in this series yet have failed to regain the Ashes. Fairer umpiring in 3rd test would have seen Aussies 3-0 up.

You wouldn't recognise that by the 'we saved test cricket' shite that England and their pet press are coming out with.

Indian guys I work with just laugh at 'bazball' while they get on with winning test series.

[Mikey1874]

20 minutes ago, Malinga the Swinga said:

The run out/ non run out was discussed but the horrendous lbw decision in favour of English not mentioned. That definitely helped England as did the decision not to give Stokes lbw in earlier tests and the catch Cummings took that was given not out.

England have enjoyed overwhelming majority of decisions in this series yet have failed to regain the Ashes. Fairer umpiring in 3rd test would have seen Aussies 3-0 up.

You wouldn't recognise that by the 'we saved test cricket' shite that England and their pet press are coming out with.

Indian guys I work with just laugh at 'bazball' while they get on with winning test series.

 

It's exaggerated as the English always do. That's an English trait. 

 

There's definitely positives with this English team. Ask the Pakistanis or the New Zealanders. Look at all the records they break virtually every game. But it's far too early to claim any major revolution. 

 

Mainly Australia have been hard headed and the English naive. And that's a lesson England need to take. Especially going to India next.

[Mikey1874]

Final placings

 

 

[Mikey1874]

As other have said, see what coverage Scotland get now. Beaten test playing Ireland twice recently now. Also as was discussed at the presentation, where are the games for Scotland to play now. Nothing else scheduled this year.

 

 

[Malinga the Swinga]

42 minutes ago, Mikey1874 said:

As other have said, see what coverage Scotland get now. Beaten test playing Ireland twice recently now. Also as was discussed at the presentation, where are the games for Scotland to play now. Nothing else scheduled this year.

 

 

That's why the players need to be picked up by franchise's, either T20 or T10. Give them the exposure they need.

ICC don't care though as Australia, India and England call shots and they don't care about Scotland, Netherlands or cricket expanding, unless they can grab all the money, hence MLC being the new expansion league.

They should start having associate players in each squad in the big leagues, not necessarily playing, but training and learning from the top players.

[Malinga the Swinga]

50 minutes ago, Mikey1874 said:

 

It's exaggerated as the English always do. That's an English trait. 

 

There's definitely positives with this English team. Ask the Pakistanis or the New Zealanders. Look at all the records they break virtually every game. But it's far too early to claim any major revolution. 

 

Mainly Australia have been hard headed and the English naive. And that's a lesson England need to take. Especially going to India next.

 

51 minutes ago, Mikey1874 said:

 

It's exaggerated as the English always do. That's an English trait. 

 

There's definitely positives with this English team. Ask the Pakistanis or the New Zealanders. Look at all the records they break virtually every game. But it's far too early to claim any major revolution. 

 

Mainly Australia have been hard headed and the English naive. And that's a lesson England need to take. Especially going to India next.

If they get beat in India, and India have been smart in choosing the venues and making England uncomfortable, then that's the two big series in cricket that bazball will have failed in.

If folk are honest, nobody cares about England beating New Zealand, Pakistan, Sri Lanka or anyone bar Australia and India. 

Might sound harsh but rubbish England teams have beaten these test nations for years.

Entertainment is fine but spectators want victories in big series or else stick to T20 blasts and whatever. 

[Footballfirst]

48 runs off an over!

 

 

[RobboM]

12 minutes ago, Footballfirst said:

48 runs off an over!

 

 

18 off the 1st ball 😂

[Sooperstar]

How do Todd Murphy l's glasses stay on his face? 

[RobboM]

Just now, Sooperstar said:

How do Todd Murphy l's glasses stay on his face? 

I don't know. How do Todd Murphy's glasses stay on his face? 

(looking forward to this punchline 😉 )

[Malinga the Swinga]

Umpires in full blown cheating mode now. Not content with ignoring edge from batter at 1st wicket, only given out after review when you could hear the nick on TV, no ow refusing to give Root, or any other batmen LBW. Review used but umpires call and as the umpires siding with England at every turn, he gets reprieve.

Contrast that with the speed they have Murphy put yesterday.

Absolute joke having neutral umpires who aren't neutral at all. How much exactly does it cost to buy these guys.

[Malinga the Swinga]

Good to see Root taking advantage and getting a score. Hell of a lot easier when you know umpires aren't going to give you out.

 

[RobboM]

One of the commentators on the radio said "Bazball"
The arrogance of it! I was ****ing raging! 😂

[Malinga the Swinga]

No idea why England still batting other than to try and get fat boy a century.

Forecast garbage over next 3 days so you'd think they would want a bowl.

Hoping they get Australia down to 9 wickets before play is abandoned.

Haven't learned a thing from last test

 

[Footballfirst]

Broad announces his retirement on Sky.

[Malinga the Swinga]

21 minutes ago, Footballfirst said:

Broad announces his retirement on Sky.

No wonder. Test series away on India, not exactly grounds that suit him and it's travelling all round India as well, while next summer it's West Indies and Sri Lanka, neither of which gets pulses going.

Scotland could beat West Indies while Sri Lanka away from home are miserable to watch.

 

[Day@theraces]

Prolific wicket taker along with Anderson. But is expected when you represent a country that plays more tests than the other nations. Couldn't hold a candle to the likes of Lilee, McGrath and the Windies bowlers. Still a great career but may well be remembered for his refusal to walk after that thick edge and giving up 35 and 36 in those overs.

[RobboM]

16 minutes ago, Day@theraces said:

Prolific wicket taker along with Anderson. But is expected when you represent a country that plays more tests than the other nations. Couldn't hold a candle to the likes of Lilee, McGrath and the Windies bowlers. Still a great career but may well be remembered for his refusal to walk after that thick edge and giving up 35 and 36 in those overs.

But playing that number of games is an achievement in itself, especially for a pace bowler. You are right it gives more opportunity for wickets but his strike rate is comparable to other top wicket taking bowlers like Shane Warne and Courtney Walsh and not all that far behind Andy Roberts or Curtly Ambrose.

[Malinga the Swinga]

42 minutes ago, RobboM said:

But playing that number of games is an achievement in itself, especially for a pace bowler. You are right it gives more opportunity for wickets but his strike rate is comparable to other top wicket taking bowlers like Shane Warne and Courtney Walsh and not all that far behind Andy Roberts or Curtly Ambrose.

He's playing and has done for years in era of TV reviews. Warne, Murali, Walsh, Ambrose, Lillee and others would have had a ton more wickets of they had benefit of reviews to compensate for playing in tests where umpires came from home country and refused to give their own players out unless the three stumps were out the ground and even then they needed convincing.

Good bowler in English conditions but, like Jimmy, wasn't as effective away from England.

I'll remember him for being clobbered for 6 sixes in an over, for giving overthrows away when Netherlands beat them off last ball and for being part of team who have failed to win Ashes since 2015.

Edited July 29, 2023 by Malinga the Swinga

[RobboM]

20 minutes ago, Malinga the Swinga said:

He's playing and has done for years in era of TV reviews. Warne, Murali, Walsh, Ambrose, Lillee and others would have had a ton more wickets of they had benefit of reviews to compensate for playing in tests where umpires came from home country and refused to give their own players out unless the three stumps were out the ground and even then they needed convincing.

Good bowler in English conditions but, like Jimmy, wasn't as effective away from England.

I'll remember him for being clobbered for 6 sixes in an over, for giving overthrows away when Netherlands beat them off last ball and for being part of team who have failed to win Ashes since 2015.

The DRS reviews work both ways though. Just look at the umpires bending over backwards to help Australia giving Wood and Anderson out clearly overturned on review 🤔

[Malinga the Swinga]

13 minutes ago, RobboM said:

The DRS reviews work both ways though. Just look at the umpires bending over backwards to help Australia giving Wood and Anderson out clearly overturned on review 🤔

Very clever. Warne and Murali would have had another 100/150 wickets each no problem. 

So of course would Botham, Willis, Flintoff,Lee, McGrath and other bowlers as batsmen got massive benefit.

If you've been watching cricket since the 70's, you would know this.

[RobboM]

7 minutes ago, Malinga the Swinga said:

Very clever. Warne and Murali would have had another 100/150 wickets each no problem. 

So of course would Botham, Willis, Flintoff,Lee, McGrath and other bowlers as batsmen got massive benefit.

If you've been watching cricket since the 70's, you would know this.

And the 100s of extra wickets would have come from where?
If Warne were to take more wickets then it surely follows that some of those would have been McGrath's. And vice versa. There are only 20 wickets to take in a match whether via DRS or not. Also they would have lost some of those wickets on appeal via DRS as we see in so many instances too.
I have been watching see 😂

[Mikey1874]

1 hour ago, RobboM said:

The DRS reviews work both ways though. Just look at the umpires bending over backwards to help Australia giving Wood and Anderson out clearly overturned on review 🤔

 

And not looking at every camera angle which they missed Bairstow running out Smith yesterday. 

 

The big home biased umpires especially 3rd umpire bias is in India followed by the West Indies.

Edited July 29, 2023 by Mikey1874

[Day@theraces]

5 hours ago, RobboM said:

But playing that number of games is an achievement in itself, especially for a pace bowler. You are right it gives more opportunity for wickets but his strike rate is comparable to other top wicket taking bowlers like Shane Warne and Courtney Walsh and not all that far behind Andy Roberts or Curtly Ambrose.

 

Of course it is. But England wickets are more bowler friendly than Aussie wickets or Indies wickets and the Duke ball is more preferable than the kookaburra. Still a fantastic bowler but my opinion stands.

[Sooperstar]

11 hours ago, RobboM said:

I don't know. How do Todd Murphy's glasses stay on his face? 

(looking forward to this punchline 😉 )

Ah shit. Can I come back to you tomorrow? 

[Sooperstar]

8 hours ago, Malinga the Swinga said:

Good to see Root taking advantage and getting a score. Hell of a lot easier when you know umpires aren't going to give you out.

 

I've said this before but I love your distain for referees, umpires etc! 

[Footballfirst]

I'm sure that someone will have the stats, but it would be interesting to see the number of LBW decisions over the test series broken down by team.

 

No of LBWs per side.

No of on field out decisions overturned per side

No of on field not-out decisions overturned by side

No of on field out decisions upheld by "umpires call" per side

No of on field not-out decisions upheld by "umpires call" per side

 

I think that is the last of those stats that is most likely to show some bias towards England, i.e. the umpires are more likely to give an England batsman not-out than an Australian. Some of the other figures broken down by umpire may show the umpires with most accuracy in their decision making.

 

The "caught behind" stats may also be of interest, but obviously there is no "umpires call" at play, i.e. the ball was hit or it wasn't.

 

I look on it a bit like VAR decisions in football, where the higher frequency of on field decisions that are overturned after VAR review reflect badly on the referees and assistants involved.

Edited July 29, 2023 by Footballfirst

[Mikey1874]

Umpires call should be changed. Now again this is partly the influence of India who originally refused to use DRS and its also concerns the technology isn't 100% accurate which is a lot due to concerns in Australia. 

 

But it does favour the batsmen. 

[Dusk_Till_Dawn]

Agree on umpires call. It literally makes no sense. Either it’s out or not out. Saying ‘oh yeah, it’s out but in this instance the umpire is entitled to give whatever’ is stupid.

[RobboM]

6 hours ago, Mikey1874 said:

Umpires call should be changed. Now again this is partly the influence of India who originally refused to use DRS and its also concerns the technology isn't 100% accurate which is a lot due to concerns in Australia. 

 

But it does favour the batsmen. 

I like Umpire's Call tbh. I think the wording used to be (way back) that you were out if, in the opinion of the umpire ...., you edged the ball, a catch was taken, a 6 or a 4, a run out, a stumping, a wide etc and I don't mind that. There's a bit of fuzziness at the edges of many decisions. A no ball, stumping or run out  can be called on millimetres on a line which is just kinda crudely painted on with a brush. I'm astonished at the number of right calls they make on caught behind between a ball glancing a bat versus coming off a thigh guard or shirt. They make their decision and overwhelmingly get it right. The teams have their reviews if they think the umpire has made a howler, and whole teams get it completely wrong too versus the lone umpire. I think the balance between umpire's call and DRS has settled down well over the years.
Mon the Umps 🙂

[Footballfirst]

1 hour ago, RobboM said:

I like Umpire's Call tbh. I think the wording used to be (way back) that you were out if, in the opinion of the umpire ...., you edged the ball, a catch was taken, a 6 or a 4, a run out, a stumping, a wide etc and I don't mind that. There's a bit of fuzziness at the edges of many decisions. A no ball, stumping or run out  can be called on millimetres on a line which is just kinda crudely painted on with a brush. I'm astonished at the number of right calls they make on caught behind between a ball glancing a bat versus coming off a thigh guard or shirt. They make their decision and overwhelmingly get it right. The teams have their reviews if they think the umpire has made a howler, and whole teams get it completely wrong too versus the lone umpire. I think the balance between umpire's call and DRS has settled down well over the years.
Mon the Umps 🙂

The umpires always used to give the batsman the benefit of the doubt, particularly with LBW decisions, which meant that those tight calls which may have been just clipping the stumps were given not out.

 

The introduction of DRS has moved the decision making more in favour of the bowler as the umpires can now give batsmen out in the knowledge that any major error will be corrected on review.

 

The point that is being debated now is whether there is a bias towards the home side (consciously or unconsciously) in the umpire's decision making (I think there has always been an unconscious bias in favour of the home team from pre DRS days).  If "umpire's call" is close enough for a batsman to be given out on review if the umpire gave it out, then it should be close enough for it to be given out, even when the umpire said not out.  It's a nonsense that identical reviews can see one given out and the other not out.

 

If the accuracy of DRS is questionable, e.g. accurate to +/- 10mm, then build that into the decision making, but make it "benefit of the doubt" and not umpires call.  The "half ball" measure (36mm) seems far too generous to batsmen unless that is the current level of accuracy of DRS. Note that there is no "umpire's call on where the ball pitched but, not unreasonably, the half ball width is used, e.g. pitching outside leg stump.

 

One question I have about DRS, specifically "snicko", is whether it is possible for a sound to be generated by a ball passing very close to, but not touching the bat, because of the rush of air between the surfaces, thus generating a spike. 

[RobboM]

6 minutes ago, Footballfirst said:

....

 

The point that is being debated now is whether there is a bias towards the home side (consciously or unconsciously) in the umpire's decision making (I think there has always been an unconscious bias in favour of the home team from pre DRS days).  If "umpire's call" is close enough for a batsman to be given out on review if the umpire gave it out, then it should be close enough for it to be given out, even when the umpire said not out.  It's a nonsense that identical reviews can see one given out and the other not out.

 

I....

I wonder though if the perceived home advantage actually derives from a real sporting home advantage. Pitches, conditions and even the ball differ around the world. Home bowlers and batsmen will play the overwhelming bulk of their cricket under those home conditions and reach Test level by excelling in those particular set ups. So the line, length and bounce will be fractionally in favour of a home bowler so they end up getting more occasions where the umpire is involved. Just my theory 😉

[Footballfirst]

1 hour ago, RobboM said:

I wonder though if the perceived home advantage actually derives from a real sporting home advantage. Pitches, conditions and even the ball differ around the world. Home bowlers and batsmen will play the overwhelming bulk of their cricket under those home conditions and reach Test level by excelling in those particular set ups. So the line, length and bounce will be fractionally in favour of a home bowler so they end up getting more occasions where the umpire is involved. Just my theory 😉

Home advantage is certainly a factor in the performances of Broad and Anderson, not excessively so, but probably close to what you might expect.

 

 

 

Anderson - 57% tests played at home - 63% of wickets

Broad - 59% tests played at home - 66% of wickets

[Sooperstar]

Australia making a good game of this. Warner finally turning up. 

[Sooperstar]

No more play today. Australia on 135-0.

[Malinga the Swinga]

6 hours ago, Footballfirst said:

The umpires always used to give the batsman the benefit of the doubt, particularly with LBW decisions, which meant that those tight calls which may have been just clipping the stumps were given not out.

 

The introduction of DRS has moved the decision making more in favour of the bowler as the umpires can now give batsmen out in the knowledge that any major error will be corrected on review.

 

The point that is being debated now is whether there is a bias towards the home side (consciously or unconsciously) in the umpire's decision making (I think there has always been an unconscious bias in favour of the home team from pre DRS days).  If "umpire's call" is close enough for a batsman to be given out on review if the umpire gave it out, then it should be close enough for it to be given out, even when the umpire said not out.  It's a nonsense that identical reviews can see one given out and the other not out.

 

If the accuracy of DRS is questionable, e.g. accurate to +/- 10mm, then build that into the decision making, but make it "benefit of the doubt" and not umpires call.  The "half ball" measure (36mm) seems far too generous to batsmen unless that is the current level of accuracy of DRS. Note that there is no "umpire's call on where the ball pitched but, not unreasonably, the half ball width is used, e.g. pitching outside leg stump.

 

One question I have about DRS, specifically "snicko", is whether it is possible for a sound to be generated by a ball passing very close to, but not touching the bat, because of the rush of air between the surfaces, thus generating a spike. 

The other thing is the noise a stud makes grazing ground or bat hitting ground. The women's Ashes saw a review lost and an lbw given because the spike wasn't big enough on snicko, but it was there.

One other bug bear is the non use of DRS to correct howlers just because teams have run out of reviews or nobody has appealed. If we know it's out or not out, then it doesn't matter if appeal made one way or the other. If a batsman nicks it and is caught, then he should be out, appeal or not. If a batsman is given lbw, has no review but DRS shows its missing stumps, then he should be recalled.

If DRS or Snicko isn't reliable, then don't use it till it is.

[Mikey1874]

These guys didn't have a review left.

 

 

[Malinga the Swinga]

1 hour ago, Mikey1874 said:

These guys didn't have a review left.

 

 

Blame Broad if you want, and many do, but the umpire should never have been allowed to take another game.

It's decisions like the one above that make you suspect money has passed hands. No other reason for it.

[Sooperstar]

2 minutes ago, Malinga the Swinga said:

Blame Broad if you want, and many do, but the umpire should never have been allowed to take another game.

It's decisions like the one above that make you suspect money has passed hands. No other reason for it.

On first viewing it does look like Broad has given that a significant nick, but it's actually only a small one. Most of the movement on the ball comes from a deflection off the keeper's hand. 

Edited July 30, 2023 by Sooperstar

[JWL]

13 hours ago, Malinga the Swinga said:

Blame Broad if you want, and many do, but the umpire should never have been allowed to take another game.

It's decisions like the one above that make you suspect money has passed hands. No other reason for it.

 

That decision tends to overshadow the blatant LBW against Jack Leach during the Ben Stokes innings. As clear an LBW as you'll ever see, the ball was smashing middle stump but the umpire (can't remember who it was) gave not out, despite England still having a review. Clear bias or total incompetence?

[Malinga the Swinga]

30 minutes ago, JWL said:

 

That decision tends to overshadow the blatant LBW against Jack Leach during the Ben Stokes innings. As clear an LBW as you'll ever see, the ball was smashing middle stump but the umpire (can't remember who it was) gave not out, despite England still having a review. Clear bias or total incompetence?

It's cheating, pure and simple.

Was it not Stokes who was LBW with 2 runs needed to win when Lyon was bowling.

Australia had burned last review in the previous over.

Umpire shit himself as England were nearing win, Stokes was the hero when he lost balance sweeping and was pinned in front of stumps.

Another decision that is not mentioned when England and their fans go on about 'the greatest innings'. It should have meant nothing. 

 

[RobboM]

1 hour ago, Malinga the Swinga said:

It's cheating, pure and simple.

Was it not Stokes who was LBW with 2 runs needed to win when Lyon was bowling.

Australia had burned last review in the previous over.

Umpire shit himself as England were nearing win, Stokes was the hero when he lost balance sweeping and was pinned in front of stumps.

Another decision that is not mentioned when England and their fans go on about 'the greatest innings'. It should have meant nothing. 

 

That was brilliant tbf 😂

[New Town Loafer]

Phenomenal bowling from Woakes here.

[Mikey1874]

25 minutes ago, RobboM said:

That was brilliant tbf 😂

 

And Nathan Lyon dropping the ball for an easy run out. Australia just before went for a very stupid review too.