3rd Test at Headingley, Leeds

[Uppercut]

That beats Edgbaston 05 for me. It's not really a fair comparison because I was much less into cricket in 05, but I think I'd prefer this one regardless. In fact I think this was the best day of sport I've seen since the '99 Champion's League final. And I don't even support England, I just really like Stokes and wanted the series to stay alive. Test cricket at its absolute best really does blow everything else out of the water.

 

[Uppercut]

You want crowds to be quiet at sports games?

It's a pretty standard strategy when playing away from home.

It's not exactly something you 'want' to see, but boring the opposition into submission can be a pretty good tactic in cricket generally, especially if it suits the players you've got.

 

[zorax]

It's a pretty standard strategy when playing away from home.

It's not exactly something you 'want' to see, but boring the opposition into submission can be a pretty good tactic in cricket generally, especially if it suits the players you've got.

Ah spark wants to silence home crowds while touring

I thought he just hated fun

 

[TheJediBrah]

There's isn't a (good) umpire in history who would have given that out live.

Rubbish. It wasn't as plumb as ball tracking made it look, but it was definitely out, and should have been given out live.

 

[Lillian Thomson]

Rubbish. It wasn't as plumb as ball tracking made it look, but it was definitely out, and should have been given out live.

I don't know how long you've been watching cricket, but my guess is not very. It was towards leg side bowled from a slight angle and the umpire couldn't tell with the naked eye whether it hit the front pad first or not or which way it was spinning if at all. It all happens in a flurry at high speed. Benefit of the doubt to the batsman is a basic fundamental part of umpiring.

 

[TheJediBrah]

I don't know how long you've been watching cricket, but my guess is not very. It was towards leg side bowled from a slight angle and the umpire couldn't tell with the naked eye whether it hit the front pad first or not or which way it was spinning if at all. It all happens in a flurry at high speed. Benefit of the doubt to the batsman is a basic fundamental part of umpiring.

Such a patronising attitude doesn't come across well even if you're right, which in this case you're not. They will be given out more often than not, and you could see from the reaction on the field how shattered everyone was that it wasn't given. I think you're being tricked by an unconscious bias.

 

[Lillian Thomson]

Such a patronising attitude doesn't come across well even if you're right, which in this case you're not. They will be given out more often than not, and you could see from the reaction on the field how shattered everyone was that it wasn't given. I think you're being tricked by an unconscious bias.

If that's your opinion fine. I'm still right, but that's life.

 

[Uppercut]

Pre-hawkeye you basically never see that given out. When they started showing hawkeye on TV pre-DRS the umpires started giving them more often, but you still wouldn't usually get that one. Being on the front foot used to be considered "doubt", especially if you were sweeping because sweeping often obscures the path of the ball. Matthew Hayden just played spin that way all the time, and when umpires started giving him out towards the end of his career he'd stomp off like he'd got a parking ticket.

The fact that DRS means those ones are now given has improved the game a lot IMO.

 

[zaremba]

That beats Edgbaston 05 for me. It's not really a fair comparison because I was much less into cricket in 05, but I think I'd prefer this one regardless. In fact I think this was the best day of sport I've seen since the '99 Champion's League final. And I don't even support England, I just really like Stokes and wanted the series to stay alive. Test cricket at its absolute best really does blow everything else out of the water.

Edgbaston was a much better match throughout though, between two better sides. The blistering first day of batting from England, Aus fighting back, daring runs from Freddie to get a lead, the great Freddie over, the ludicrous Harmison slower ball, all before you got to the gut wrenching tension and heroism of the final day.

Plus we were spared the dire post-mortem re whether the (plumb!) LBW which wasn’t given in the closing stages of Australia’s run chase was or wasn’t out.

All with the series on a knife edge, almost in the same way as at Headingley, but with much more riding on that series than this.

So Edgbaston wins it for me.

 

[Uppercut]

Edgbaston was a much better match throughout though, between two better sides. The blistering first day of batting from England, Aus fighting back, daring runs from Freddie to get a lead, the great Freddie over, the ludicrous Harmison slower ball, all before you got to the gut wrenching tension and heroism of the final day.

Plus we were spared the dire post-mortem re whether the (plumb!) LBW which wasn’t given in the closing stages of Australia’s run chase was or wasn’t out.

All with the series on a knife edge, almost in the same way as at Headingley, but with much more riding on that series than this.

So Edgbaston wins it for me.

Funny, the thing that Edgbaston really has going for it for me is something you didn't mention- Warne's second innings bowling.

 

[Spikey]

if only Furball was here to remind people that leg stump actually exists

 

[TheJediBrah]

Pre-hawkeye you basically never see that given out.

Pure garbage, go back through some old highlights once in a while. Spinners pre DRS got gifted plenty of wickets that they shouldn't have.

 

[trundler]

You may want to take this to the revisionism thread..

 

[Burgey]

Edgbaston was a much better match throughout though, between two better sides. The blistering first day of batting from England, Aus fighting back, daring runs from Freddie to get a lead, the great Freddie over, the ludicrous Harmison slower ball, all before you got to the gut wrenching tension and heroism of the final day.

Plus we were spared the dire post-mortem re whether the (plumb!) LBW which wasn’t given in the closing stages of Australia’s run chase was or wasn’t out.

All with the series on a knife edge, almost in the same way as at Headingley, but with much more riding on that series than this.

So Edgbaston wins it for me.

Or the Simon Jones one. Fmd that was hilarious. Bowden apologised to lee after the game about it. They put on another dozen or so too. Full toss, back pad in front of middle. Not out. The only explanation is he literally blinked and missed it

 

[zaremba]

Funny, the thing that Edgbaston really has going for it for me is something you didn't mention- Warne's second innings bowling.

All under the vague heading of “Aus fighting back” I suppose!

But a far better match than this overall. England played poorly for much of Headingley whereas (at least as I recall it) Edgbaston was just a titanic Test from day 1 to the end.

 

[Lillian Thomson]

Bad umpires giving things out wrongly is certainly a valid argument. But an off spinner bowling around the wicket to a left hander anywhere around the line of leg stump shouldn't be getting LBW's unless the umpire can see that it's straightened. - which in this case without DRS he couldn't.

 

[stephen]

Actually I thought it looked more plumb live than in replays. The front pad deflection made it look as though it straightened more than it did. But it made it look like it was hitting middle instead of leg, which is still out.

It was a horrible decision which would gave definitely been reviewed and overturned if Australia had reviews left, which they didn't due to a really poor review. It doesn't make the obviously incorrect original decision any better, just like the lack of drs in 2005 didn't make the "Martyn smashing the ball onto his pad" decisions any better. It's cricket, England won and that's all that's left to be said.

 

[Daemon]

I don't know how long you've been watching cricket, but my guess is not very. It was towards leg side bowled from a slight angle and the umpire couldn't tell with the naked eye whether it hit the front pad first or not or which way it was spinning if at all. It all happens in a flurry at high speed. Benefit of the doubt to the batsman is a basic fundamental part of umpiring.

Honestly the longer you've been watching cricket, the more likely you'd be wrong because your judgement would be clouded by decades of incorrect umpiring traditions.

 

[hazsa19]

Wasn’t Kaprowicz plumb when trying to hit across the line with like 60 runs still needed?

 

[Lillian Thomson]

Honestly the longer you've been watching cricket, the more likely you'd be wrong because your judgement would be clouded by decades of incorrect umpiring traditions.

I don't disagree that DRS has changed judgement completely. But it hasn't got to the stage yet where an umpire is going to give something out on the field because a lot of judgement in the past was probably wrong because DRS shows more to be hitting than we previously would have thought.