Kahuna wrote:For anyone who can be bothered searching, it has just been mentioned on the radio that Bairstow tried a similar stumping dismissal on Labushagne day 4 when he was 7. Hypocrite, thy name is Johnny.
So if the ball is dead when it the keeper takes it cleanly, "stolen" byes like we often see in the white ball games are no longer permissible?
FWIW, seen the de Grandehomme dismissal and have no problems with that. The fielder had a legitimate ping at the stumps in the course of the live ball action, and, again, it is something we see numerous times every Test.
stan wrote:I didn't like it at all, however how many times has a keeper binged a ball at thr stumps after collecting it in the hope of running out the batsmen?
Pretty much all the time.
So I still don't like it however the response from the English has been a next level disgrace and honestly I hope this happens again to the English.
I’m with you. I don’t like it either. But the rules are the rules and until they change it, it’s out.
There are no stupid questions, just stupid people.
To be fair, McCullum has said regrets very much, and subsequently in later years did a lot to turn around the way NZ went about their cricket and public persona.
As always, the fanatics from each side will defend their side no matter what happens... The pub test says it was not in the spirit, I didnt like it when it happened. Is it out? Yep. Same applies for Starc not out decision, should have been given out but wasn't.
stan wrote:I didn't like it at all, however how many times has a keeper binged a ball at thr stumps after collecting it in the hope of running out the batsmen?
Pretty much all the time.
So I still don't like it however the response from the English has been a next level disgrace and honestly I hope this happens again to the English.
I’m with you. I don’t like it either. But the rules are the rules and until they change it, it’s out.
Agree... i didnt like it but i also didnt like the Starc catch decision either.
However, the rules are the rules so both were the correct decisions.
I half blame the umpire who had already started walking to square leg and had pretty much unclipped Greens hat. Surely if that's his movements he should have called over first.
If the rules need to be changed it would be pretty simple.
For a batsman to be given out he needs to be gaining either a batting advantage or attempting a run. That would cover both batsmen running down the wickets to gain an advantage in their shot and being stumped and would cover the obvious run out dismissal.
whufc wrote:If the rules need to be changed it would be pretty simple.
For a batsman to be given out he needs to be gaining either a batting advantage or attempting a run. That would cover both batsmen running down the wickets to gain an advantage in their shot and being stumped and would cover the obvious run out dismissal.
So may as well remove stumping dismissals for batsmen whose back foot lifts or are dragged out.
Dolphin Treasure wrote:Your an attention seeking embarsement..
