SA Footy

amber_fluid wrote:

Brodlach wrote:Didn’t know that, last time I say that then.

Me either.
I thought Paki was just shortened like Aussie.

My thoughts exactly

locky801 wrote:And the English coach has also done the same

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/sport/cricke ... beUigp3XAY

Seems Baz is a hypocrite.
https://www.theroar.com.au/cricket/vide ... 6JQN9yI7qw

Booney wrote:

FlyingHigh wrote:Yes
As opposed to a stumping

The ball was dead....when Starc took the catch.

Well that raises as interesting question.

It was dead as both teams had considered it dead by that stage.
But technically, at the time of Starc's slide it wasn't, so if Stokes and Dunkett thought they had seen the ball touch the ground, they could have kept running and potentially be run out.
Sounds far-fetched, but couId easily happen in the dying stages of a close white-ball game with the batting team trying to steal an extra run and put it back on the onus of the third umpire to make the catch decision.

Brodlach wrote:

amber_fluid wrote:

Brodlach wrote:Didn’t know that, last time I say that then.

Me either.
I thought Paki was just shortened like Aussie.

My thoughts exactly

Always been a derogatory term in the UK and wog over there is even more offensive than it is here.

batmanbegins wrote:We had everything go our way this test and still lost, not great signs unfortunately.

And on the other hand certainly cause for optimism for the Australians.

The "spirit of cricket" discussion may be a therapeutic distraction for England players and some of their fans, but at the end of the day it is very tough for a touring side to win consecutive matches in England, and especially after losing the tosses and generally batting under less favourable conditions. Fantastic effort from Australia, and you get the feeling that things could get even better for them if the top five get a bit more time to bat under the blazing sun.

Edit: Obviously Lyon's injury made things harder.

Our tactics yesterday didn't suggest we had that right, either.

Only need to draw one of the remaining Tests to retain the Ashes.

Booney wrote:Our tactics yesterday didn't suggest we had that right, either.

Exactly our bowling and field placements from the time Bairstow got out were abysmal.

Booney wrote:

Brodlach wrote:

amber_fluid wrote:

Brodlach wrote:Didn’t know that, last time I say that then.

Me either.
I thought Paki was just shortened like Aussie.

My thoughts exactly

Always been a derogatory term in the UK and wog over there is even more offensive than it is here.

Yes it has always been a derogatory term over there but it’s still thrown around very frequently from my experience

RoosterMan wrote:England can go and get stuffed. Can't wait to beat these smug flogs at Headingley and retain The Ashes.

[URL unfurl="true"]https://www.foxsports.com.au/cricket/the-ashes/ashes-2023-australia-vs-english-second-test-at-lords-uk-press-reaction-pat-cummins-slammed-jonny-bairstow-dismissal-video/news-story/d796e93bdfd03256801743a50616472b[/URL]

Sent from my SM-G781B using Tapatalk

I reckon it was Oliver Holt who asked Cummins whether we are going to now see Mankads and underarm bowling.
Cummins was very good - "Maybe a good idea if we keep having flat wickets"

**** off Holt

I thought this pitch was pretty fair.
Obviously dead by day 5 but the balls Tongue bowled to get his wickets in the first innings did a fair bit.
Decent turn as well.
If Lyon could've bowled we would've won easy.
And as someone else said we got to bat with the lights on when it was tough going and still made 400 getting sent in.

Does the wicket-keeper count as one of the fielders behind square? Carey's very smart dismissal of Dunkett he started leg side of the pitch meaning there was 3 behind square if it counts

daysofourlives wrote:Does the wicket-keeper count as one of the fielders behind square? Carey's very smart dismissal of Dunkett he started leg side of the pitch meaning there was 3 behind square if it counts

Also did he move after the batter took guard as well?

daysofourlives wrote:Does the wicket-keeper count as one of the fielders behind square? Carey's very smart dismissal of Dunkett he started leg side of the pitch meaning there was 3 behind square if it counts

Also did he move after the batter took guard as well?

batmanbegins wrote:Was clearly out and just a stupid move by Jonny. Summed up his test really.

Stokes was incredible, it is kind of frustrating he only bats like this in the biggest moments because he is a better bat then his stats suggest.

We had everything go our way this test and still lost, not great signs unfortunately.

Stokes was incredible again and almost one the game off his own bat. Although we bowled some crap to him, it was still a cracking innings.

Take away the controversy and so far we have had 2 really good test matches.

daysofourlives wrote:Does the wicket-keeper count as one of the fielders behind square? Carey's very smart dismissal of Dunkett he started leg side of the pitch meaning there was 3 behind square if it counts

Law 41.5. Limitation of on side fielders

At the instant of the bowler’s delivery there shall not be more than two fielders, other than the wicket-keeper, behind the popping crease on the on side. A fielder will be considered to be behind the popping crease unless the whole of his person whether grounded or in the air is in front of this line.
In the event of infringement of this Law by any fielder, the striker’s end umpire shall call and signal No ball.

daysofourlives wrote:Does the wicket-keeper count as one of the fielders behind square?

Nope (see Law 28.4).

Carey continues to grow and improve as a test cricketer every match, great to watch.

Now up to 83 dismissals as well, ticking along nicely.