King_Kohli
First Class Captain
- Joined
- Sep 18, 2019
- Runs
- 5,754
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: this_feature_currently_requires_accessing_site_using_safari
Couldn’t agree more with Shane here. I think Kane missed a trick here.
They are off for bad light again, annoying how the lights are on and still the umpires deem it unplayable.
Its the red ball - it is not visible in flood lights. Flood lights are no substitute for natural lights in a day test match.
Kohli is lucky to still be there
I dare say india is in a winning position.
NZ some cheap wickets quickly
Kohli is lucky to still be there.
I dare say india is in a winning position.
NZ some cheap wickets quickly
Of course, conditions cannot be perfect. It's just that umpires have always been keen to take players off when the light dims and take a cautious light meter reading which then becomes a benchmark for the rest of the match. However, at some stage common sense needs to prevail and there should be guidelines for umpires to only take players off when conditions are genuinely dangerous for play.
All these delays do a lot of harm to test cricket.
Kohli is lucky to still be there
I dare say india is in a winning position.
NZ some cheap wickets quickly
Looked very edgy against colin and southee?
Care to elaborate?
If there is no more play, we will be losing only 25 overs today which can be recovered in next 3 days.
Still 4 days to go, first day has 65 overs completed.
Another 150 more runs and its Hammer, Nail, Coffin for NZ.. NZ need some wickets asap, 300 runs on board and facing Ishant, Bumrah, Shami & the spin twins will be too much for NZ..
Looked very edgy against colin and southee
Kohli is lucky to still be there
I dare say india is in a winning position.
NZ some cheap wickets quickly
)
I went off at 120/3 thinking it's done.
Can't believe they came back twice after that.![]()
It is an English summer day. Sunset is at 9:26 pm. Don’t be surprised if they are back again.
India will win if they make 300.
For the last 3 weeks you have been going on and on and on how India will be schooled by Southee and other NZ pace demons. Took you only 60 overs to change your tune? No conviction at all. Sad.
Its patently unfair to ask a batsman to play when the ball is not visible - it makes conditions lopsided in favor of the bowling team. I get that the repeated interruptions are frustrating for everyone, but you cant make the game unfair to satisfy the spectators.
ICC should have thought about weather conditions before playing a WTC final in June in South England.
This test is being played in worse light than the one for which the players went off in Southampton. Does it mean the women cricketers have better eyesight? Sure the pace of the bowling is slower, but then again the umpires at the WTC final didn't seem to ask Williamson to take off his fast bowlers.
I think if NZ had spinners in their team the play could have continued a bit more, but they shot themselves on the foot by packing 5 pacers.
I think if NZ had spinners in their team the play could have continued a bit more, but they shot themselves on the foot by packing 5 pacers.
Nah, it's always overblown by the officials. The women's test in Bristol is currently been played in considerably worse light than the level at which the umpires took the players off in Southampton. There is a lack of will from the officials to be flexible around the issue.
In 2017, there was a directive from the ICC to continue playing under lights as long as it wasn't physically dangerous for the batsmen, which allowed a significant portion of a day's play in the West Indies - England test at Lord's to be played practically under artificial lights without any ill-effects for the players. That flexibility seemed to disappear without explanation afterwards.
There needs to be more transparency and better communication between players, officials, and fans around bad light. The first step is to make public the readings on the light meter which they recognize as benchmarks for dangerous light conditions.
It's not so much about if it's dangerous to continue or not, but it's more about if continuing to play in reduced light conditions would be unfair to one of the teams and handicap the batting team or not. Someone like Boult isn't going to knock out a batsman even in dark conditions. But in reduced light conditions, the batsman might miss an inswinger and might trigger a collapse which might not have happened in normal light conditions.
Imagine team A batting in reduced visibility and losing wickets in a clump late in the day, while team B bats next day, but light remains good and as a result, team B doesn't get the same handicap that Team A got during its batting innings.
The very essence of test cricket is for the play to be subject to varied pitch and environmental conditions, if the interpretation is that conditions should be fair at all times then no team should be asked to bat on Day 5 on a crumbling pitch. Nor should there be the dusk advantage to the fielding team in a pink ball test.
You are right about conditions changing, but I won't put varied pitch conditions with low light conditions. One situation is beyond the umpire's control, but the umpire can fully control the same light standards for both teams.
There has to be a balance struck between dangerous light and overcautious umpiring.
And how do you do that? Surely you do that only by having a universal light threshold because what visibility is "dangerous to play" is a highly subjective opinion, isn't it..
There should be sufficient data points from light meter readings from each test venue around England over the last four decades for them to have sufficiently objective measures of what exactly constitutes bad light and what reading constitutes unplayable conditions.
It's ludicrous that in this day and age we are still vulnerable to the nebulous judgment of umpires, which isn't even communicated properly to the fans at the ground.
But we do not know if the umpires took an arbitrary number as the threshold to go off in this match..
For all we know they might have a designated universal visibility threshold and operating based on that. We just might not be informed about it.
I've "been going on and on" for 3 weeks ? Really?
I just made a few comments before the start of this match.
Yea I thought nz would be all over india. And even then I stated the reason being the lack of match practice.
Some predictions can go wrong. What is wrong with that?
Most fans, even Indian fans, expected india to be bundled out.
That new ball spell was some of the worst bowling I've seen from us in favorable conditions.
Missed the mark and let the openers get away, a good start there and India could have been 6-7 down at stumps.
But that's pointless, not good enough. Southee and Boult will need to step up.
Lmao. That's precious.
You have been moaning about how India were unworthy of the WTC final and how you'd rather watch AUS among other gibberish. Given the intensity of your rants for the past few weeks, surprised that it took a mere 60 overs for you to change your stance. Weak.
We Indians have a habit of jinxing our own players in the hope of creating a miracle win.New Zealand were clear favorites going into this match due to their preparation as opposed to the Indian team that arrived a week ago without any match practice.The confidence with which gill and sharma played against the best bowling attack was commendable.Oh please. Literally every Indian poster on this site thought india would be bundled out for under 100. Go attack them. Weak of you to make me your only target when no one else gave india a chance to survive the day.
Indias batting today exceeded everyone's expectations.
Nz just won in england and india just arrived with no match practice. My comments were Perfectly reasonable. Get off your high horse
I never "moaned" about india being unworthy of the WTC final. You are probably confusing the many other anti india posts with mine. They seem to have triggered you immensely.
NZ wouldn't have dared pick five pacers if over rate penalties of runs applied to the final. They know what they are doing.
First session and 4 the session of a bowling innings is quite diffrent energy wise. And nz have to bowl in two innings without a spinner. They just dont care and rightly so. Not their place to make rules about overrate in final.NZ bowled 28 overs in the first session, which is pretty good. de Grandhomme rattles through his overs very quickly, so I don’t think NZ will have too many problems getting through 90 overs in a day.