by scottiemc » Sun Feb 15, 2009 2:44 pm
by Bulldogga55 » Sun Feb 15, 2009 6:37 pm
by The Hunter » Sun Feb 15, 2009 7:32 pm
by Real McCoy » Mon Feb 16, 2009 8:51 am
by Amateur Footy » Mon Feb 16, 2009 9:56 am
by wycbloods » Mon Feb 16, 2009 10:03 am
Amateur Footy wrote:ICC destroyed the Ramblers on the weekend. Not a friendly game as usual and a few dropped catches in the field and some good batting led to some big scores by the ICC boys. Made far too many runs for us to chase and we crumbled.
I was involved in the strangest dismissal I have ever seen on the weekend and (without looking up the official rules - which I already have) would like the opinion of others as to whether or not it should be out. If unsure would you expect benefit of the doubt to go to the batsman?
A ball was driven hard into the pitch and bounced almost straight up at which point it was again hit by the cricket bat on the follow through above the batsmans head. The ball was hit backwards to second slip where the catch was taken and after an appeal the finger was raised despite protests from the batsman. Is it out / unsure / not out?
by Booney » Mon Feb 16, 2009 10:06 am
Amateur Footy wrote:ICC destroyed the Ramblers on the weekend. Not a friendly game as usual and a few dropped catches in the field and some good batting led to some big scores by the ICC boys. Made far too many runs for us to chase and we crumbled.
I was involved in the strangest dismissal I have ever seen on the weekend and (without looking up the official rules - which I already have) would like the opinion of others as to whether or not it should be out. If unsure would you expect benefit of the doubt to go to the batsman?
A ball was driven hard into the pitch and bounced almost straight up at which point it was again hit by the cricket bat on the follow through above the batsmans head. The ball was hit backwards to second slip where the catch was taken and after an appeal the finger was raised despite protests from the batsman. Is it out / unsure / not out?
by Rik E Boy » Mon Feb 16, 2009 10:39 am
Amateur Footy wrote:ICC destroyed the Ramblers on the weekend. Not a friendly game as usual and a few dropped catches in the field and some good batting led to some big scores by the ICC boys. Made far too many runs for us to chase and we crumbled.
I was involved in the strangest dismissal I have ever seen on the weekend and (without looking up the official rules - which I already have) would like the opinion of others as to whether or not it should be out. If unsure would you expect benefit of the doubt to go to the batsman?
A ball was driven hard into the pitch and bounced almost straight up at which point it was again hit by the cricket bat on the follow through above the batsmans head. The ball was hit backwards to second slip where the catch was taken and after an appeal the finger was raised despite protests from the batsman. Is it out / unsure / not out?
by bay boy » Mon Feb 16, 2009 11:11 am
Amateur Footy wrote:ICC destroyed the Ramblers on the weekend. Not a friendly game as usual and a few dropped catches in the field and some good batting led to some big scores by the ICC boys. Made far too many runs for us to chase and we crumbled.
I was involved in the strangest dismissal I have ever seen on the weekend and (without looking up the official rules - which I already have) would like the opinion of others as to whether or not it should be out. If unsure would you expect benefit of the doubt to go to the batsman?
A ball was driven hard into the pitch and bounced almost straight up at which point it was again hit by the cricket bat on the follow through above the batsmans head. The ball was hit backwards to second slip where the catch was taken and after an appeal the finger was raised despite protests from the batsman. Is it out / unsure / not out?
by jb » Mon Feb 16, 2009 12:36 pm
by Roseboy » Mon Feb 16, 2009 1:43 pm
by Amateur Footy » Mon Feb 16, 2009 2:07 pm
by jb » Mon Feb 16, 2009 2:39 pm
by wycbloods » Mon Feb 16, 2009 2:40 pm
Roseboy wrote:I'm clearly biased towards AF, but the decision just smacks of being pressured into it.
My thoughts are very similar to Rik E Boy's regarding the 2nd hit not counting. So if you play a ball, it heads towards the stumps, can't have a 2nd swing and hit it for 4, so how can you get out to it?
It's unusual, that's for sure. But some common sense should dictate that you have a moment to think about it and think through the scenario. The fact there were 2 paid umpires there and they still got it wrong beggers belief that this occurred.
Is there a tribunal/review panel for stupidity?
by Real McCoy » Mon Feb 16, 2009 3:06 pm
by JohnnyG » Mon Feb 16, 2009 3:10 pm
Booney wrote:If any team is upset by the cancellation of play they need to get over it.
The rules are in place and the executive consulted all the clubs before making a heat policy and then before they revised it.
If it so happens that a team who is well on top does not get the points,or an team well down gets 3 points for nothing it is all about player welfare and that should be the main priority on the mind of all captains.I know it is for me.
I come out to enjoy the game,the mateship and the competition of the sport. For mine,in 40+c two of those are gone. The mateship remains but the overall enjoyment of the day coupled with the potential for one or more of my team to fall ill means I back the heat policy 100%.
Now,dont get me wrong,I used to be of the theory "harden up",but extra years (and kg's) have made me think more about what it means to play Div 4 hard wicket and it certainly isnt worth risking any ones health over.
by wycbloods » Mon Feb 16, 2009 3:17 pm
JohnnyG wrote:Booney wrote:If any team is upset by the cancellation of play they need to get over it.
The rules are in place and the executive consulted all the clubs before making a heat policy and then before they revised it.
If it so happens that a team who is well on top does not get the points,or an team well down gets 3 points for nothing it is all about player welfare and that should be the main priority on the mind of all captains.I know it is for me.
I come out to enjoy the game,the mateship and the competition of the sport. For mine,in 40+c two of those are gone. The mateship remains but the overall enjoyment of the day coupled with the potential for one or more of my team to fall ill means I back the heat policy 100%.
Now,dont get me wrong,I used to be of the theory "harden up",but extra years (and kg's) have made me think more about what it means to play Div 4 hard wicket and it certainly isnt worth risking any ones health over.
Booney - did you play Div 4 on Saturday for NH iv - if so, which one were you?
by Amateur Footy » Mon Feb 16, 2009 3:18 pm
by JohnnyG » Mon Feb 16, 2009 3:40 pm
wycbloods wrote:JohnnyG wrote:Booney wrote:Now,dont get me wrong,I used to be of the theory "harden up",but extra years (and kg's) have made me think more about what it means to play Div 4 hard wicket and it certainly isnt worth risking any ones health over.
Booney - did you play Div 4 on Saturday for NH iv - if so, which one were you?
He certainly didn't he plays for WYC.
by wycbloods » Mon Feb 16, 2009 3:49 pm
Amateur Footy wrote:Didn't need 2 umpires IMO, just one good one. The games between us and ICC wouldn't be pleasant to umpire. Andrew Wright is an interesting character, but he keeps the game in check so would have been a better option.
Association foots the bill for the 2nd umpire too.
Competitions SANFL Official Site | Country Footy SA | Southern Football League | VFL Footy
Club Forums Snouts Louts | The Roost | Redlegs Forum |