• Welcome, guest!

    This is a forum devoted to discussion of Wolverhampton Wanderers.
    Why not sign up and contribute? Registered members get a fully ad-free experience!

The Cricket Thread

Yep the arrogance retains the urn listen to Glen McGrath in the post mortem suggesting Australia knew they had to just survive 3.3 days to retain the urn as if it was planned.
Cmon seriously if that was the case they’d have posted 500+ to guarantee England were out the game. And would you seriously allow yourself to be on the edge of defeat and reliant on the weather.
It is what is and everyone knows how things work in test cricket.
Nevertheless explain this situation to a none cricket fan and they’d laugh in your face.
Test cricket shoots itself in the foot time after time on a situation that easily resolved.
But forget that keep the archaic rules and keep playing back to back test matches to draw more money in.
 
There plenty of things that can be changed without moving too far from the traditions.

Obviously over rates are terrible. But still don’t get why these overs are just allowed to be lost forever. They were going to allow play to 7:30 to make up for lost time, so why not do that every day to make up for the overs lost for absolutely no reason.

Then the whole bad light thing is a farce when there’s floodlights. If the ball can’t be seen in floodlights (I’m not having it) then change it to the pink one. You can’t even argue it “changes the game” when they change the ball 4 times an innings anyway and a new “old ball” starts doing stuff.

Then everything just seems so slow when there’s a rain delay. They inspect the pitch and give it the go ahead, but then it takes us 45 minutes to start!

Obviously there’s more drastic things like reserve days you could bring in but I don’t think that is neccesary if you bring in all the other things.
 
You want play extended beyond 7.30 take it up with the TV companies who are very anti as it would dominate schedules.
 
No, just up to 7–30, which we already do now when it rains (but don’t as It’s too dark…) Can’t speak for anyone else but on sky it would make no difference.
 
The Harry hindsight’s now saying Stokes should’ve declared at lunch on Friday then we would’ve won. Some people really are dense. We batted an extra hour an half. No way we’d been able to get the extra 5 wickets and chase down what was set which would’ve probably been close to a 100.
If buts and maybes and we’ll never know, Australia we’re pretty broken at close Friday night and would’ve gone to the oval with confidence on the floor and the momentum fully behind England.
 
The Harry hindsight’s now saying Stokes should’ve declared at lunch on Friday then we would’ve won. Some people really are dense. We batted an extra hour an half. No way we’d been able to get the extra 5 wickets and chase down what was set which would’ve probably been close to a 100.
If buts and maybes and we’ll never know, Australia we’re pretty broken at close Friday night and would’ve gone to the oval with confidence on the floor and the momentum fully behind England.
I thought at the time we should have declared at 12.15 (with a lead of 140) and had half an hour bowling at them before lunch (which I think was taken at 13.00 on Friday).
In hindsight it wouldnt have made any difference whatever we'd done with the amount of time lost to rain.
 
Last edited:
Yeah no time of declaration would have changed anything. The pitch was absolutely fine, we needed to make it a 3 innings game and scoring rapidly helped that. I thought we’d get 2 sessions over the last 2 days which would have been enough but wasn’t to be.
 
Warwickshire 22/6 against Middlesex, good work lads.
 
36/7. Might not last 20 overs here.
 
Plenty of wickets tumbling in most of the matches. A bowling morning, I would suggest!
 
Middx 12/3 now, think the pitch inspectors might want a word!
Got to factor in that it *is* Middlesex who are epically shit with the bat this year :D

It was nipping about earlier but nothing ridiculous that I could tell on the stream, Bamber in particular bowled very nicely and the batsmen weren't good enough to deal with it.
 
Argument to say he’s completed the shot in which case the laws say he’s not out.
I suspect five out of ten umpires give it one way and the other five the other.

Third umpires that is. I wouldn’t think the on field umpires saw it.
 
He hasn’t completed the shot at all. The downswing after hitting the ball and the bat wrapping round the shoulders is part of the shot until the bat is grounded back in the crease
 
Back
Top