5th Ashes test at the SCG - 3rd to 7th Jan 2011

[locky801]

Johnson bounces Pietersen and he hits it down the throat of beer of takes it easily 3/165

[Jim05]

Beer gets his 1st wicket, Cook gone, oh no now we have an umpire checking to see if it is a no ball and it is


Now here we go again, this is bull, they now have to check every ball of every test

Oh thats tragic, i feel for Beer

I dont. Stay behind the line clown. No excusr for a spinner to no-ball, youve got a 3 step runup ffs

Don't sugar-coat your feelings Jimbo.

Sorry LM one of my pet hates. It happens at club level all the time. When i used to be skipper id drag them.What is to be gained by doing it. Its bad enough from a quick but a guy off two or three steps is terrible. Sorry had to get it off my chest

[locky801]

In everything that has been said however, I reckon he has bowled really really well

[Jim05]

In everything that has been said however, I reckon he has bowled really really well

Bowled tidy without looking too threatning, bit early to call i feel

[locky801]

In everything that has been said however, I reckon he has bowled really really well

Bowled tidy without looking too threatning, bit early to call i feel

didnt say he looked threatening just said he has bowled well, probably bowled better than Smith has this series

[Phantom Gossiper]

Your bowling to a bloke who doesnt know which end of the bat to hold, why bowl around the wicket and short? Why not over and attack the stumps?!

[locky801]

Engl 3/167 at stumps

[mal]

Engl 3/167 at stumps

MJ 2/42
HILF 1/52
BEER 1/25

[stampy]

time for a beer

[redandblack]

Engl 3/167 at stumps

MJ 2/42
HILF 1/52
BEER 1/25

Nothing wrong whatsoever with the Beer no-ball call. It was a clear no-ball and not easy for an umpire to call due to the raised heel, so a good referral.

Correct decision.

[locky801]

Engl 3/167 at stumps

MJ 2/42
HILF 1/52
BEER 1/25

Nothing wrong whatsoever with the Beer no-ball call. It was a clear no-ball and not easy for an umpire to call due to the raised heel, so a good referral.

Correct decision.

Agreed but would it have been reviewed if it was hit for 6 or even just hit to mid off along the ground

[mal]

Engl 3/167 at stumps

MJ 2/42
HILF 1/52
BEER 1/25

Nothing wrong whatsoever with the Beer no-ball call. It was a clear no-ball and not easy for an umpire to call due to the raised heel, so a good referral.

Correct decision.

Correct decison YES
But when Beer gets hits for runs does the umpire do a referral ?
Im tipping he would have bowled other close no ball calls or no balls today

Some of us just want consistency
Each delivery , jugded on their merits, not just the ones when a batsman gets out

[redandblack]

Well, if you add up all the balls bowled in the series, or all the wickets taken, the 2 referrals so far are a negligible fraction.

In each case, the umpire has been proven correct. The umpire only needs to refer when he's unsure and I think it's just common-sense to refer only when it really matters.

Spinners shouldn't bowl no-balls.

PS Mal: If they referred when runs are scored off a no-ball, it's just an extra run the batsman misses out on, not the unfair end of an innings.

If they referred every delivery, we'd only bowl 30 overs a day and no-one would go to the cricket.

Common-sense application, mate.

[westozfalcon]

With Pietersen dismissed I reckon the scales have tipped in Australia's favour. I'm tipping them to secure a first innings lead from here.

[mal]

Well, if you add up all the balls bowled in the series, or all the wickets taken, the 2 referrals so far are a negligible fraction.

In each case, the umpire has been proven correct. The umpire only needs to refer when he's unsure and I think it's just common-sense to refer only when it really matters.

Spinners shouldn't bowl no-balls.

PS Mal: If they referred when runs are scored off a no-ball, it's just an extra run the batsman misses out on, not the unfair end of an innings.

If they referred every delivery, we'd only bowl 30 overs a day and no-one would go to the cricket.

Common-sense application, mate.

Simple equation
Call all off them or none of them
None of them preferrably and keep the game moving as sugggested Bloodsman

[locky801]

referals (note the spelling) are killing cricket.

I have no problem if during the course of the game an umpire thinks he has missed a no ball and refers it but they dont do it, they only do it when wickets have fallen, as i pointed out, Bowden went into damage control with the one today. He was jumping around more than a particular person that wears boxing gloves, he knew he had stuffed up and if it wasnt a wicket he would not have done a thing about it. Might be interesting to watch the start of the telecast tomorrow, they may well highlight those that did not get wickets that were not called and not reviewed.

Fair enough no-balls are in the rules but alas how many players world wide for over 100 years have got out to a no-ball which was never called,

Also good point raised about spinners bowling no-balls, no excuse, we had Hauritz last season and then Beer today

I can't wait for the umpire review system to come into vogue in football

[smithy]

Some interesting comments from Robert Craddocks blog.
Love him or hate him, he ahs good inside info.
I put some of the better Q&A's here.

Red is the question and black is Craddocks response.

Khawaja made 37!!! God, there has never been a more over-rated innings in history...talk about the real issue! Micheal Clarke's continual failure

That is a fabulous point. I really like the look of Khawaja but how bad are we going. He was front and back page news today and he made 37. Imagine what happens when he makes 50. Techincally and temperamentally he looks the goods but I try and shy away from over-rating players because so many disappoint.

G'day Crash, is Khawaja the long term answer at number 3? Absolutly!!! He just looks a real class act doesn't he reminds me a bit of VVS Laxman or a Rahul Dravid, it wasn't the runs he made but the way he made them a 10-12 year player, he looks level headed and humble and that will hold him in good stead. What did we learn from yesterday? Please dont pick Watson to open, put him at 5 or 6, bring Marsh into open i know you have your doubts on him crash, but we've gotta find out if he is up to it or not sooner or later. We don't have the luxury anymore of blokes like Hussey and Lehmann makin 10 000 runs before they get a test debut. Mike Hussey had a great summer but regardless after this test G.S Chappell should tap him on the shoulder and say "times up pal and thank you". The future must start now. What are your thought's?


I do have my doubts about Marsh. Sadly he is not real bright which means he has never come to grips with the parameters of his game. Most good batsmen are smart fellows ... or at least street smart. In fact name me a top batsman who was not smart ...

One simple question: who is responsible for Hauritz not being in the team? Hilditch or Ponting? Hasn't he got Apeneck Sweeny (Strauss) out a zillion times? Isn't he the only shield player to score two hundreds in consecutive matches this year.? Didn't he get a five for at Perth? I want an explanation from them. One of them is incompetent in not selecting Hauritz, and the other should never have let this happen. Thoughts?

I believe Ponting just lost faith in him. he wanted Hauritz to bowl like Harbhajan from wide of the stumps into the rough and Hauritz disagreed. Unfortunately they fell out over it.


What chance is Cam White of making his way into the test team via the Andrew Symonds route? i.e. continue playing really well at ODI level, good fielder and he has an added bonus of being a good leader as well

Maybe though I just feel his limited footwork will always count against him against the good sides. I cannot have it that he would have been a success against this attack on seaming decks this series. I know people will say he scored a century in Hobart for the Aussie XI side but I still reckon he is a limited overs slogger.


Michael Clarke's form must be Australia's biggest worry, he hasn't ever reached the potential he displayed as a kid. Is it time for him to make way for an in form shield batsman?

It really is a worry. Almost from the point he went up the order from five to four he has nosedived. It's a worry. There is no guarantees he will find better form. He could be shot. I am not sure where Australia goes after that

I wanted to know what your thoughts are with the Australian selection committee? Especially Greg Chappell? I feel that he is reason why Australian cricket is in turmoil at the moment. What he doing with Steve Smith? Is he a batsmen or bowler? If he's a batsmen surely he is not the best no.6 Australia has. What about Cameron White? Why isn't he in the team? More importantly, why isn't he being considered for the captaincy. He certainly has a better record and more experience than Pup. Your thoughts?

No I think Chappell is the best selector. he has strong opinions but they are good opinions. I am not sure what to make of Steve Smith except to say I like his attitude. he is like a young Steve Waugh. All this suffering will be good for him. I am wondering whether he could be a captain of the year 2015.


I still don't understand why Hilfenhaus is in the team, he hasn't looked like taking a wicket all series. Peter George offers bounce and swing like none of our bowlers have gotten yet in 4 matches. He is as close to the English bowlers as we have, and yet the selectors stick with the proven yet average performances of Hilfenhaus. It's baffling

that is fair point. The selectors were furious at Bollinger for turning up half fuit in Adelaide and I reckon that cost him a place in the XI here. Hilfenhaus has just four wickets for the series and just doesn't see to be able to think batsmen out. I thought he would match Anderson wicket for wicket this series. I was wrong ... again

David Hussey surely should have been chosen. He is a better bet than Smith

Isn;t it sad he never played a Test. He is a bit of a favorite player of mine because I think he is the sort of player who would have risen to the challenge. If Brendan Nash can average 37 in Tests for the Windies, Hussey would surely have done better for Australia

When do we look at Hill and Lynn

I reckon Chris Lynn will be playing for Australia within two years. He is a fine player.

[Dutchy]

The big question is why didnt Billy call the no ball without the referral, I understand they can easily miss a fast bowlers but a spinners?

Also Ive never understood why some think its acceptable for a pace bowler to bowl no balls but not a spinner? Spinners also stretch their last stride searching for that extra effort/speed also...

[RustyCage]

The big question is why didnt Billy call the no ball without the referral, I understand they can easily miss a fast bowlers but a spinners?

Also Ive never understood why some think its acceptable for a pace bowler to bowl no balls but not a spinner? Spinners also stretch their last stride searching for that extra effort/speed also...

The law is crap and needs to be changed. If the line between the back of the heel and the ground is behind the crease, its not a no ball, how is the umpire supposed to be able to judge that accurately! Should be a part of the foot must be on the ground, behind the crease. Simple.

And Bowden, think it's a no ball, call it. Miss it, too bad.

[Lightning McQueen]

Well, if you add up all the balls bowled in the series, or all the wickets taken, the 2 referrals so far are a negligible fraction.

In each case, the umpire has been proven correct. The umpire only needs to refer when he's unsure and I think it's just common-sense to refer only when it really matters.

Spinners shouldn't bowl no-balls.

PS Mal: If they referred when runs are scored off a no-ball, it's just an extra run the batsman misses out on, not the unfair end of an innings.

If they referred every delivery, we'd only bowl 30 overs a day and no-one would go to the cricket.

Common-sense application, mate.

Great response, as I stated earlier, they need some sort of Cyclops technology, I'd rather see batsmen dismissed fairly and the result no hindered by poor umpiring decisions.