England vs India 1st test debate

by Guest Sun 24 Jul 2011, 7:17 pm

First topic message reminder :

Liam_Main wrote: England side:

1) Andrew Strauss (C)
2) Alistair Cook
3) Jonathan Trott
4) Kevin Pietersen
5) Ian Bell
6) Eoin Morgan
7) Matt Prior (WK)
8) Stuart Broad
9) Graeme Swann
10) Chris Tremlett
11) James Anderson

India side.

1) Abhinav Makund
2) Gautam Gambhir
3) Rahul Dravid (WK)
4) Sachin Tendulkar
5) VVS Laxman
6) Suresh Raina
7) MS Dhoni (C)
8) Harbhajan Singh
9) Zaheer Khan
10) Praveen Kumar
11) Ishant Sharma

Should be a terrific match and series!

My Prediction: England to win

Series Prediction: 1-1

C'mon England!

by robbo277 Mon 25 Jul 2011, 11:47 am

Swann time!

by robbo277 Mon 25 Jul 2011, 11:52 am

Double change with Broad coming on as well. We could do with another wicket before 12:25, then look at getting 4th before lunch and have an awkward 10 minutes or so at Tendulkar.

by Gregers Mon 25 Jul 2011, 11:58 am

Great decision from Billy there.

by msp83 Mon 25 Jul 2011, 12:02 pm

Gambhir had a close one against Broad, although eventualy it was the right call from Billy B, but Gautam doesn't look comfortable with that elbow of his, taking his hand off the bat when he plays a shot.

by dummy_half Mon 25 Jul 2011, 12:13 pm

liverbnz

Laxman has not got a good record in England (by comparison with Australia). Suggests he has more difficulties against lateral movement than against pace and bounce. As such, I wouldn't put the mortgage on him being the foundations for an Indian survival bid, especially given how much the ball is still doing.

We need another one in the next half hour though, before Sachin is able to come in.

by alfie Mon 25 Jul 2011, 12:18 pm

Umpires have been very good in this match, have they not? Quite a few close decisions and all the technology keeps proving them right.
Couple of lbws might have been given perhaps but so marginal no-one would complain.

So far at least the lack of lbw reviews has not impacted this series.

Still time devil

by msp83 Mon 25 Jul 2011, 12:20 pm

Prior was never convinced about that review, Broad was the one who wanted it. another good call from the umpire.

by msp83 Mon 25 Jul 2011, 12:21 pm

Gambhir trying too many shots, think the elbow has something to do with it.

by Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler Mon 25 Jul 2011, 12:22 pm

Apparently snicko had it out. Hotspot is not relaible in proving there wasnt a nick, thats why i find it so weird thathe BCCI is happy to use it but not hawkeye due to "unreliability"

As it ios though no change was made to a borderline Umpires call, cant really complain. But it was right to reveiw it.

by alfie Mon 25 Jul 2011, 12:29 pm

Need to get Laxman if a result is to be obtained - the man can bat for a week when set...

...and Tendulkar to come - apparently he is now OK to bat if a wicket falls.

Plenty of time still to force a win but I feel England do need at least one more in this session.

by Raymond Mon 25 Jul 2011, 12:37 pm

VVS rode his luck like a pony in that innings, Come on England.

by Cowshot Mon 25 Jul 2011, 12:38 pm

Laxman! From a Jimmy long hop!

Looks like the cricketing gods are with us. Very Happy

by Raymond Mon 25 Jul 2011, 12:38 pm

Hope Tendulkar gets a golden.

by Stellar Key Mon 25 Jul 2011, 12:41 pm

Afternoon, good to see Jimmy in taking wickets. Attacking fields and lots of variety and surprise could be the solution imo.

Testy 20 minutes for st and gamibhir coming up. Cool

by BATH_BTGOG Mon 25 Jul 2011, 12:41 pm

Whats wrong with Tendulkar,

Delhi Belly?

by Raymond Mon 25 Jul 2011, 12:41 pm

Hope Tendulkar gets a duck.

by msp83 Mon 25 Jul 2011, 12:42 pm

Oh MG!, VVS has been done in by a loose airy shot 2nd time in the match. Now certainly England should pocket it, with a half fit Gambhir and Tendulkar and all that.

by Stellar Key Mon 25 Jul 2011, 12:44 pm

Yesssss Gumbhir's gone. laughing

by Raymond Mon 25 Jul 2011, 12:45 pm

Umpires have been fantastic in this match, another great decision.

by msp83 Mon 25 Jul 2011, 12:47 pm

Tendulkar's away in some style, but India's test save man Gautam Gambhir is gone. good decision from the umpire yet again. And Graeme Swann gets iss first one in the 2nd innings.

by BATH_BTGOG Mon 25 Jul 2011, 12:48 pm

C'MON Lads

by Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler Mon 25 Jul 2011, 12:49 pm

Amazing how lebron and his various guises has been missing for the last day ...wonder why Whistle

Huge pressue on Raina now to prove he deserves to be in the side.

Still by no means a forgone conclussion, but even if India get the draw you have to say its been Englands test. They only lost 14 wickets, theyve already taken that many Indian ones for 60 less than they scored in the first innings.

by dyrewolfe Mon 25 Jul 2011, 12:49 pm

Oh my word! Game most definitely on now.

England must be scenting victory in the air with the departure of Gambhir.

Or can the The Legend, Raina and Dhoni keep Jimmy, Stewie and Swanny at bay?

Gripping stuff!

by Guest Mon 25 Jul 2011, 12:50 pm

One things for sure, this'll be a cracker of a series!

by alfie Mon 25 Jul 2011, 12:50 pm

Two well-timed wickets ! Looking good Smile

by Cowshot Mon 25 Jul 2011, 12:52 pm

It'll be one heck of a save if India manage the draw from here.

by msp83 Mon 25 Jul 2011, 12:53 pm

Think its all over for India, 75 overs is an awful lot for a half fit tendulkar to bat through. And of course he needs someone ele to stay with him en if he has to play a binder.

by GSC Mon 25 Jul 2011, 12:55 pm

Tendulkar to hit a 6 off every ball and win it before tea.

by Cowshot Mon 25 Jul 2011, 12:55 pm

msp: Looks very tough for India. But this game has given us a good few twists and turns and it wouldn't surprise me if there are more.

by robbo277 Mon 25 Jul 2011, 12:55 pm

51 overs bowled with a couple more before lunch. If Swann gets an end for the afternoon session we'll be looking at the new ball just after tea. The goal has to be to have at least one end open (only one of Tendulkar, Raina or Dhoni at the crease) when the new ball comes. Singh, an injured Zaheer Kahn, Kumar and Sharma might be able to stick around, but not for a whole session.

by dyrewolfe Mon 25 Jul 2011, 12:56 pm

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:Apparently snicko had it out. Hotspot is not relaible in proving there wasnt a nick, thats why i find it so weird thathe BCCI is happy to use it but not hawkeye due to "unreliability"

As it ios though no change was made to a borderline Umpires call, cant really complain. But it was right to reveiw it.

Perhaps the reason is that the "snickometer" and "hotspot" use physical means of detecting contact between ball and bat / pad / glove, (sound and heat), whereas Hawkeye uses complex mathematical formulae to project a ball's flight.

You could say that makes the first two more reliable (provided they're interpreted correctly). That said, I've no problem with any of them. I reckon they're all pretty reliable and a darn sight better than relying solely on an umpire's judgement. No criticism of them, but some decisions can be incredibly difficult to call and they have a tough enough job as it is.

by dyrewolfe Mon 25 Jul 2011, 12:58 pm

Would like to see Tendulkar get a hundred...provided England still win, of course. Wink

by Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler Mon 25 Jul 2011, 1:03 pm

dyrewolfe wrote:
Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:Apparently snicko had it out. Hotspot is not relaible in proving there wasnt a nick, thats why i find it so weird thathe BCCI is happy to use it but not hawkeye due to "unreliability"

As it ios though no change was made to a borderline Umpires call, cant really complain. But it was right to reveiw it.

Perhaps the reason is that the "snickometer" and "hotspot" use physical means of detecting contact between ball and bat / pad / glove, (sound and heat), whereas Hawkeye uses complex mathematical formulae to project a ball's flight.

You could say that makes the first two more reliable (provided they're interpreted correctly). That said, I've no problem with any of them. I reckon they're all pretty reliable and a darn sight better than relying solely on an umpire's judgement. No criticism of them, but some decisions can be incredibly difficult to call and they have a tough enough job as it is.

Yes but snicko and hotspot regulalry disagree, as iin this case, which proves at least one of them is unreliable. Theres an issue with hotspot, whiclt it seems pretty reliable that if there is a hotspot then there was contact...but often a spot cant be seen when there was, so its not positive evidence that there wasnt. No imagine an umpire clearly sees and hears and edge...but its reviewed and hotspot shows nothing, it would take a very brave umpire to ignore it and stick by his decision.
I dont know if theres any truth in this vaseline thing, but if there is then the ICC need to step in and ensure that players cannot use this to cheat the technology.
Lets then look at the Gambhir decision. The big argument against Hawkeye is that the predicted path becomes less reliable the further the impact is form the stumps, which is true. Thefamous case of Tendulkar being reviewed and given out miles down the pitch still holds a bad taste for many Indians who feel it should never have been given. The Gambhir decision was pretty similar with him well down the pitch, yet in this case an umpire was happy to give it. If umpires are happy to guess if the ball would have hit the stumps then where is the objection to a complex mathematical model based on accuratly observed measurements and consistently applied calculations making the same call? Its going to be more reliable and more consitent than an umpire ever could be.

by alfie Mon 25 Jul 2011, 1:11 pm

dyrewolfe wrote:
Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:Apparently snicko had it out. Hotspot is not relaible in proving there wasnt a nick, thats why i find it so weird thathe BCCI is happy to use it but not hawkeye due to "unreliability"

As it ios though no change was made to a borderline Umpires call, cant really complain. But it was right to reveiw it.

Perhaps the reason is that the "snickometer" and "hotspot" use physical means of detecting contact between ball and bat / pad / glove, (sound and heat), whereas Hawkeye uses complex mathematical formulae to project a ball's flight.

You could say that makes the first two more reliable (provided they're interpreted correctly). That said, I've no problem with any of them. I reckon they're all pretty reliable and a darn sight better than relying solely on an umpire's judgement. No criticism of them, but some decisions can be incredibly difficult to call and they have a tough enough job as it is.

Good point wolfe

Perhaps if we all stopped yearning for perfection and just accepted the use of all forms of technology as an aid , with the benefit of the doubt going to the batsman as of old, there would be less agonizing over it all...

by Guest Mon 25 Jul 2011, 1:27 pm

great session for england Smile

by robbo277 Mon 25 Jul 2011, 1:38 pm

I like that now if you're over 2.5m down, it comes down to Umpire's Call. So if the ball pitches outside off, strikes someone in line but 2.5m down the pitch and is going on to hit the stumps (according to Hawkeye), but the umpire gave it not out then that decision remains, because there is enough doubt in the technology.

I know the Gaumbhir decision was proved correct, but I don't know why he couldn't review it. Obviously he couldn't ask for hawkeye to prove it pitched outside leg or was going over or anything like that, but if he believes he edged it onto his pads he'll only need slow-mo replays and hotspot to prove that.

I hope hawkeye comes into UDRS across the board. I think the problems with snicko is that it takes too long to generate. But in an ideal world we would have snicko, hotspot and slow-mo replays to look at edges.

by Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler Mon 25 Jul 2011, 1:42 pm

robbo277 wrote:I like that now if you're over 2.5m down, it comes down to Umpire's Call. So if the ball pitches outside off, strikes someone in line but 2.5m down the pitch and is going on to hit the stumps (according to Hawkeye), but the umpire gave it not out then that decision remains, because there is enough doubt in the technology.

Yep but this is the bit I dont get ...if youre having the rule that hawkeye cant make the decision at that distance then surely you have to say you cant be out lbw at that distance fullstop. If hawkeye cant accuratly make a fair asssement than how on earth can an umpire?
If you go down that route then you get back to the old days where off spinners find it almost impossible to get lbws and get driven out of the game.

I prefer a systme with a "cone of doubt" or the "umpires call" ball width zone thing

by robbo277 Mon 25 Jul 2011, 1:50 pm

Hawkeye doesn't make decisions, it either over-turns them or doesn't have sufficient evidence to over-turn them.

If the impact is over 2.5m away, Hawkeye isn't seen as a more reliable judge than the umpire, so therefore can't over-turn his decision.

by robbo277 Mon 25 Jul 2011, 1:56 pm

This is why we need DRS!!!

by hodge Mon 25 Jul 2011, 1:56 pm

Well India got their wish

by GSC Mon 25 Jul 2011, 1:57 pm

Well out.

by Guest Mon 25 Jul 2011, 1:57 pm

Controversy.

by GSC Mon 25 Jul 2011, 1:59 pm

The one country against DRS :/

by Guest Mon 25 Jul 2011, 2:00 pm

If we don't get the win, prepare for an outcry once more.

by alfie Mon 25 Jul 2011, 2:01 pm

There I was praising the umpires , and Blind Billy goes and lets Tendulkar off to one that would have knocked all three down : Rolling Eyes

Just have to get him again I guess - have to make sure that doesn't spook them.

Was a bad call though - it just looked out immediately and even "outer" on replay...

by hodge Mon 25 Jul 2011, 2:02 pm

well if Sachin were to get his hundred here it will be tainted

by Raymond Mon 25 Jul 2011, 2:02 pm

What happened i turned over for a second and turn back and something has happened.

by msp83 Mon 25 Jul 2011, 2:04 pm

Think that Sachin one was the first mistake of the match from the umpires.

by Raymond Mon 25 Jul 2011, 2:06 pm

I'm guessing a plump lbw to Sachin was turned down.

by Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler Mon 25 Jul 2011, 2:06 pm

robbo277 wrote:Hawkeye doesn't make decisions, it either over-turns them or doesn't have sufficient evidence to over-turn them.

If the impact is over 2.5m away, Hawkeye isn't seen as a more reliable judge than the umpire, so therefore can't over-turn his decision.

Yes but thats my point, thats ridiculous. If the technology cant be accurate at that disatnce how can an umpire be?

How is an umpire any better placed to guess the path of a ball from that distance when they cant even relaibly judge the point of impact yet alone consitently assess where the swing would take it?

If you are saying theres no accurate waty to judge if it would hit the stumps then there should be no method that allows a player to be given out at theat distance. Hawkeye could still be used to show if the ball picthed and impacted inline etc. The predcicted path part should then have a slideing cone whoich shows the element of doubt dependant on teh distance form the stupms and calculations on expected ball movement used to judge where the technology reaches a certain level of accuracy that is greater than the umpires. If the ball ids predeicted to hit or miss by a sufficent margin then the decision can be overturned. That way you will never get hawkeye overturning decisions it was less well able to judge than the umpire and everyone should be happy.

As we can see the rule that Tendulkar cant be given out lbw isnt right.

MSP it wasnt the first mistake, snicko showed that Broads review was correct, although I wouldnt call it a bad call since the touch was clealry marginal.

by Sponsored content