What's new

Australia v Pakistan | 3rd Test | Sydney | Jan 3-7, 2017 | Day 4

Wahab gets unfairly criticized. He's the least of our worries. Amir and Wahab have bowled well in this series
 
Will Dave Warner's fifty count towards the record books?

I thought that after the Steve O'Shaughnessy knock that innings against joke bowling no longer count.

:)
 
qaiser said:
I guess you dont have a reason to support your thought so you just keep doing useless criticizing.
Click to expand...
And I guess you're going to keep crying over a law has existed for a century,and which has actually benefitted Pakistan many times.
Let it go mate.
 
Arham_PakFan said:
And I guess you're going to keep crying over a law has existed for a century,and which has actually benefitted Pakistan many times.
Let it go mate.
Click to expand...
Why are you advocating him
He can answer for himself.
So no rules have changed in Cricket if they are 100 yrs old even if they are wrong.
I like to see some rules in favor of bowlers.
 
and that should be the end of the career for Misbah, Sami aslam (at the moment..needs to go back to domestic cricket and learn the art of making runs.. just not defending), Rahat Ali, Imran Khan..
Need to look out for some alternatives of Yasir Shah as well (he is goin to struggle big time whenever there is no assistance from the pitch coz he has no varieties and thats why he doent play ODI as well)
Give some more time to Babar Azam as he has looked good in ODIs and i feel he can get runs in ODIs in Australia as well..
 
qaiser said:
Why are you advocating him
He can answer for himself.
So no rules have changed in Cricket if they are 100 yrs old even if they are wrong.
I like to see some rules in favor of bowlers.
Click to expand...

I'm not advocating for him.I'm just tired of you repeatedly posting one thing.
 
I'm deeping it right now, Maxwell is gonna hurt us bad in the ODI's and T20's.
 
street cricketer said:
There is a reason cricket is called "the gentleman's game" and spirit of the game is held in high esteem. It is also a game of aesthetics. These are the things that separate cricket from a pure brawny sport like baseball. Till mid 1930s, the only major line that was bowled by a bowler was outside off stump. Bowling on the legs was severely frowned upon as ugly. Making a batsman nick behind was actually seen as the "right" way of getting him out. Was the same case with batting when playing with the bat away from the body or being severely out of shape when playing the shot. There is a reason playing leg side hoicks is called "hacking" while hitting a cover drive is seen as a "magisterial shot". Only after the bodyline series, the short ball came into more widespread use with a leg side field theory and even though the legside field got outlawed, bowling at the body with a short ball became an option for the bowler.

Anyway, if you keep such an lbw rule, everyone will start bowling at the legs with a negative line trying to get an lbw, denigrating the sport and its aesthetics as we know. A batsman can still be adjudged out when pitched legside if he's offering no shot and just padding away, which was an earlier tactic used by batsmen before the new rule change forced them to play at them. But if he has played a shot but missed it, he can't be given out.
Click to expand...
Ok thank you. Good mature answer. :nasser
 
Arham_PakFan said:
I'm not advocating for him.I'm just tired of you repeatedly posting one thing.
Click to expand...
Because he criticized me and other posters unnecessarily without giving reason for criticism other than its obvious and 100 yr old rule.
 
it is becoming increasingly obvious to me that most of the posters on this forum do not understand fine nuisances of test cricket and they just post whatever comes to thier mind. very unfortunate
 
No attempt by younis Bhai to farm the strike?
 
Guys - have started a thread for Om Puri on the Time Pass forum. Please post there.
 
Yasir should have taken atleast 4 or 5 more wickets in the series with a better fielding performance and that would have helped his confidence to perform better in the series.
 
qaiser said:
Why do you think pitching outside leg should be not out even if its hitting good part of stumps?
Click to expand...
it is very easy for a bowler to hit the leg from outside leg stump. When the ball is pitched outside off or on stumps, you have free movement of your bat. But because in cricket, you stand sideways, when its pitched outside leg, you have to bring your bat around the leg (move your leg out of the way. Also a spinner or an outswing bowler can pitch way outside leg and make you lbw behind your bat
 
Indiafan said:
it is very easy for a bowler to hit the leg from outside leg stump. When the ball is pitched outside off or on stumps, you have free movement of your bat. But because in cricket, you stand sideways, when its pitched outside leg, you have to bring your bat around the leg (move your leg out of the way. Also a spinner or an outswing bowler can pitch way outside leg and make you lbw behind your bat
Click to expand...

I understand and agree to the rule now bro.
 
The feeling of helplessness when your team plays absolute Rubbish cricket :(

No one should be made to feel this way.....One of the worst feelings in cricket.
 
street cricketer said:
There is a reason cricket is called "the gentleman's game" and spirit of the game is held in high esteem. It is also a game of aesthetics. These are the things that separate cricket from a pure brawny sport like baseball. Till mid 1930s, the only major line that was bowled by a bowler was outside off stump. Bowling on the legs was severely frowned upon as ugly. Making a batsman nick behind was actually seen as the "right" way of getting him out. Was the same case with batting when playing with the bat away from the body or being severely out of shape when playing the shot. There is a reason playing leg side hoicks is called "hacking" while hitting a cover drive is seen as a "magisterial shot". Only after the bodyline series, the short ball came into more widespread use with a leg side field theory and even though the legside field got outlawed, bowling at the body with a short ball became an option for the bowler.

Anyway, if you keep such an lbw rule, everyone will start bowling at the legs with a negative line trying to get an lbw, denigrating the sport and its aesthetics as we know. A batsman can still be adjudged out when pitched legside if he's offering no shot and just padding away, which was an earlier tactic used by batsmen before the new rule change forced them to play at them. But if he has played a shot but missed it, he can't be given out.
Click to expand...

Apart from spirit of the game, there are 2 technical issues in this.

Cricket is a side on game - if a bowler bowls outside leg & bring it back, it's actually out of sight for the batsman. Here the rule is applied in a way that you can get batsman out bowling (pitching) outside leg, but batsman also has the right to even it out by using his pad - if he is bowled or caught or stumped/hit wicket it stands, but using pad as 2nd line of defense is considered as part of batting technique.

2nd one is a debate for over 170 years ago - Fuller Pilch was a fantastic batsman in 1820s to 40s, best of his generation & then he was a pro umpire as well. During his batting days, he argued with umpires regarding LBWs against him, particularly leg line LBWs. His point was, how are you sure that the ball was going to hit the stick?

When he was umpiring, he denied few of the best bowlers leg side LBW, particularly those pitched out side leg & almost plumb in front. When asked, he used to say - how many times you have got a batsman bowled behind his leg that you are sure the ball would have hit the sticks or dislodged the bail? As an Umpire, my job is not to find a way to give batsman out, rather my job is on your (Bowler's) appeal, adjudicate if the batsman is guilty (out) or not - for that, I need to be absolutely sure that, he would have been out. I have to stick to my first principle as Umpire - a batsman who might be out, can get benefit of doubt, but no way I can give death sentence to an innocent or probabilities.

It went to a level that, the law was amended to deliberate padding (out) & not deliberate padding on balls pitched out side leg, which went out of control in 1st few matches - Umpires were challenged how he is judging which one is deliberate & which unintentional. Eventually, they immediately changed the "Intention" clause & the rule stood like what is still in practice. Gradually, batting techniques improved & batsmen are using pad play to survive even plumbest of LBWs, but you don't expect those days Cricket administrators to be clowns like now - 49% DRS is on field call, 51% over rule ............ that they'll confuse the rule with ambiguity.

This is one of the most fundamental cricket rules, probably registered in MCC manual sometimes around 1844; which hardly ever was challenged. I understand the impact of the rule in terms of it's merit (on judging a batsman out), impact (on batting technique) & effect (on fielding/bowling strategy) - never had any issues with it.
 
FlickedOffHips said:
You're supposed to pick up quick wickets along with giving away runs in T20. These figures are as bad as you can get. Yasir's Australian nightmare. They said Ashwin was a bad traveller. :ashwin
Click to expand...
Tbf he is injured and opening the bowling to Warner.
 
Zeshan547 said:
Sarfraz need a rest too, enough of this rubbish,
Click to expand...

he was never a good wicketkeeper. in every innings he will drop a catch or will miss a stump chance

his batting is also just OK outside UAE. what has he done in england, NZ and aus in 9 test matches?
 
FlickedOffHips said:
fair enough but injured every match? today's just the tip of the iceberg.
Click to expand...

He was unfit from the NZ Series, which I felt from his movement; but can't challenge pros working with PAK team. He was stiff from the 3rd Test against WI, which I wrote in 2nd innings of that match thread. A leggi, who bowls with his shoulder & twist from waste (unlike finger spinners, who use elbow & fingers) can't & I repeat can't be worked like 85 overs in that UAE heat.

And Amir as well - unfit from Gabba, which I can see from his run-up, but Misbah is having his last few days' office - who cares after that; if Yasir & Amir is out for 6 months, that's next Captain's problem.
 
MMHS said:
Apart from spirit of the game, there are 2 technical issues in this.

Cricket is a side on game - if a bowler bowls outside leg & bring it back, it's actually out of sight for the batsman. Here the rule is applied in a way that you can get batsman out bowling (pitching) outside leg, but batsman also has the right to even it out by using his pad - if he is bowled or caught or stumped/hit wicket it stands, but using pad as 2nd line of defense is considered as part of batting technique.

2nd one is a debate for over 170 years ago - Fuller Pilch was a fantastic batsman in 1820s to 40s, best of his generation & then he was a pro umpire as well. During his batting days, he argued with umpires regarding LBWs against him, particularly leg line LBWs. His point was, how are you sure that the ball was going to hit the stick?

When he was umpiring, he denied few of the best bowlers leg side LBW, particularly those pitched out side leg & almost plumb in front. When asked, he used to say - how many times you have got a batsman bowled behind his leg that you are sure the ball would have hit the sticks or dislodged the bail? As an Umpire, my job is not to find a way to give batsman out, rather my job is on your (Bowler's) appeal, adjudicate if the batsman is guilty (out) or not - for that, I need to be absolutely sure that, he would have been out. I have to stick to my first principle as Umpire - a batsman who might be out, can get benefit of doubt, but no way I can give death sentence to an innocent or probabilities.

It went to a level that, the law was amended to deliberate padding (out) & not deliberate padding on balls pitched out side leg, which went out of control in 1st few matches - Umpires were challenged how he is judging which one is deliberate & which unintentional. Eventually, they immediately changed the "Intention" clause & the rule stood like what is still in practice. Gradually, batting techniques improved & batsmen are using pad play to survive even plumbest of LBWs, but you don't expect those days Cricket administrators to be clowns like now - 49% DRS is on field call, 51% over rule ............ that they'll confuse the rule with ambiguity.

This is one of the most fundamental cricket rules, probably registered in MCC manual sometimes around 1844; which hardly ever was challenged. I understand the impact of the rule in terms of it's merit (on judging a batsman out), impact (on batting technique) & effect (on fielding/bowling strategy) - never had any issues with it.
Click to expand...

Agreed. The evolution of the lbw law over the years has been a fascinating one.

Remember reading that Sutcliffe was one of the prime opponents of the ban on the legside padding away rule.
 
fast1975 said:
he was never a good wicketkeeper. in every innings he will drop a catch or will miss a stump chance

his batting is also just OK outside UAE. what has he done in england, NZ and aus in 9 test matches?
Click to expand...

What's wrong with you guys? He is the next PCB Captain for Test, ODI & T20, at the age of 30, with comfortably 4/5 years hidden in that 30.
 
street cricketer said:
Agreed. The evolution of the lbw law over the years has been a fascinating one.

Remember reading that Sutcliffe was one of the prime opponents of the ban on the legside padding away rule.
Click to expand...

Hobbs as well. I think, Archie MacLaren (Or Ranji?)gave a fantastic technical explanation of this rule sometimes in 1893 or 94, just before the start of Professional County Cricket. I read that in some copy of Wisden, but forgot most details - just can recall the gist now.
 
ExplicitAI said:
Worst tour of Yasir's career.
Click to expand...

TBH, worst is an understatement, he has been absolutely manhandled, even that is an understatement, the scar that warner has put on his psyche, will take huge amount of work to recover, he has been made to look like a school kid and the pasting has been more severe and brutal match by match, only saving grace has been riaz to some extent, rest have been absolute filth, from wasim, waqar, to asif and Shoaib to guys like Rahat and imran , that is a huge slide.
 
So, stability has brought PAK to 1.5 fit bowlers after 2.5 Tests & in total 11 days & a bit. Actually 2, but I'll have to take some discount before Imran counting as a bowler in AUS.

It's a stupidity of the highest order to pick aged bowlers, using Misbah & YK as example of fitness.
 
Given the number of no-balls Wahab bowls, why doesn't he simply change his run-up to bowl six inches earlier?
 
Now this beyond insanity, yasir still on, for goodness sake give it to azhar, or do you want yasir to fracture his leg or to scare him so much mentally that he never forget this phainta? There is not a single justification of keeping him on now.
 
JaDed said:
Wonder if Aus would take a crack at Pakistani batsman today.
Click to expand...

They'll - 7-8 overs, so that PAK openers basically play 2 innings - half an hour on day 4 & then a restart again next morning. Bonus is, Smith 'll unleash his 2 pacers for the key 20 overs of Kookaburra at full throttle - 4 each tonight; 6 each next morning.

PAK has to come out of UAE, or UAE tracks have to change - otherwise, future is India of 60s & 70s; or may be even Bangladesh of 2000 .......
 
Zeshan547 said:
Now this beyond insanity, yasir still on, for goodness sake give it to azhar, or do you want yasir to fracture his leg or to scare him so much mentally that he never forget this phainta? There is not a single justification of keeping him on now.
Click to expand...

That's stability, continuity, establishment .... Azhar can only bowl after 40 overs .......
 
MMHS said:
They'll - 7-8 overs, so that PAK openers basically play 2 innings - half an hour on day 4 & then a restart again next morning. Bonus is, Smith 'll unleash his 2 pacers for the key 20 overs of Kookaburra at full throttle - 4 each tonight; 6 each next morning.

PAK has to come out of UAE, or UAE tracks have to change - otherwise, future is India of 60s & 70s; or may be even Bangladesh of 2000 .......
Click to expand...

India of 60's and 70's won 2 tests in Australia and won in West Indies and England so not sure what u are on about.
 
Waqar is talking about Gabba and why Australia should give a lead of 500 instead of 450 to Pakistan. He forgets that Pakistan had over 2 days to play then. 450 in 3 sessions is impossible on last day IMP
 
Vayuu said:
India of 60's and 70's won 2 tests in Australia and won in West Indies and England so not sure what u are on about.
Click to expand...

This is problem with most Indian posters here - why you take every comment on face value? This PAK side has won 2 Tests in ENG 5 months back - point is not that. Point is, in 60s & 70s Indian team was loaded with 6 batsmen & 4 spinners, of the 6 batsmen, 2 were used to take the shine of new ball & at one point that batsman was even Sunil Gavaskar.
 
Waqar commentary sounds very weird as if he is not responsible for bowlers like IK playing for Pakistan
 
MMHS said:
They'll - 7-8 overs, so that PAK openers basically play 2 innings - half an hour on day 4 & then a restart again next morning. Bonus is, Smith 'll unleash his 2 pacers for the key 20 overs of Kookaburra at full throttle - 4 each tonight; 6 each next morning.

PAK has to come out of UAE, or UAE tracks have to change - otherwise, future is India of 60s & 70s; or may be even Bangladesh of 2000 .......
Click to expand...

India sadly gets a lot of flak for 70's but we won our first tour 69 in NZ and then 71 in West Indies and lost 3-2 to Australia by the end of 70's(where we defeated Aus by an innings in Sydney) I get that its not enough but think we get a lot of flak considering we have performed better than Pakistan in those countries eventhough Pakistan has always been considered better than us in those decades.
 
Pitch has nothing in it for spinners but have to say, Yasir is bowling some absolute rubbish here
 
Yasir sha's make me cry

the lad has no clue what to do....feel really sorry to him
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Devadwal
  • Locked
Australia vs India | 5th Test | Sydney | January 03-07 | Pre-Match Discussion
2
Replies
87
Views
3K
BCCI-Enforcer
B
FearlessRoar
Pakistan Shaheens (258 & 222/3) comfortably defeat Sri Lanka 'A' (115 & 364) by 7 wickets in 1st Four-Day match
Replies
74
Views
3K
BouncerGuy
BouncerGuy
Cricket Warrior
South Africa end Day 3 at 27/3 in their second innings, needing 148 to win the first Test against Pakistan
10 11 12
Replies
925
Views
18K
kron
K
The Bald Eagle
  • Poll Poll
Australia (181 & 162/4) defeat India (185 & 157) by 6 wickets in the 5th Test match and win the 5-match series 3-1
32 33 34
Replies
3K
Views
44K
RamLakhan
R
Cricket Warrior
Australia (118/3) crush Pakistan (117) in 3rd T20I by 7 wickets, completing 3-0 T20I series sweep
6 7 8
Replies
585
Views
9K
Kroll
Kroll
Back
Top