We Don't Like Cricket... We Love It!

HaroldBishop

Megalodon
Joined
Mar 8, 2012
Messages
54,673
Reaction score
7,386
Location
Sydney
Anyone watching the Border series on Kayo?

I didn't know Lillee and Marsh backed the Poms at 500/1 in a Test (after day 4) and we lost.
 

Gards

Jaws
Joined
Apr 25, 2010
Messages
18,215
Reaction score
1,715
Location
At the Tucky
Bill Lawry would have done this when he was captain.

Even without the milestone 200, some captains make the opposition take to the field for an over or 2 in the first session before declaring, just to annoy them.

Was it Bill Lawry that declared when one of his batsman was a handful of runs from making his century and then Australia went on to lose or draw the test match anyway?

I think team first, milestones second but you would want to be fairly confident that the decision to declare is going to bring you a victory or you are seriously going to demoralize the batsman. I wonder if that batsman was given a message to hurry up cause captain Bill is going to pull you in soon


Adam Zampa is a full blown tool, but he shouldn't be given the opportunity to try and mankad someone.

In games with a video umpire, all deliveries where the batter backing up is out of their crease it should be called a run short. So there's no benefit in cheating the system.

or the batsman could just stay in his crease... they know the rules. You learn when your a kid to keep your bat in the crease and not start walking out of it until the bowler is just about to release the ball. If you arn't to be given out (cause its a dog act by the bowler) then why stay in your crease at all?

I mean how far down the pitch should the non striker be given a head start?

Imagine if the batting team needed 1 run to win a game and the non striker is half way up the pitch to steal the run, what is the bowler suppose to do and those runs go against the bowlers stats.

I think the rule is in place for a good reason, not Zampas fault he was given an opportunity to enforce it and that the non striker tried to exploit some sort of mythical gentlemens agreement and expect Zampa to just be a good bloke. T20 is a circus but it's still a professional game with things at stake

It's a good rule, it really shouldn't be controversial at all

I recall Starc having some firm words with the non striker about it in the MCG test but what might have sorted the issue out for Starc quicker was taking the non strikers bails off as the verbal warnings seemed to take a while to sink into the non strikers head

I actually don't mind the non striker trying to get a head start on the run but he shouldn't be given a pass on doing it and should be fair game with no stigma or negativity towards bowler or batter for getting the bails clipped off by the bowler (i.e. a legitimate tactic for both sides). Let the non striker weigh up the risk and reward and if the bowler is good enough to spot it and react. Thinking a bit about stealing bases in baseball

Ofcourse we don't want a situation where we get alot of dead balls cause the bowler is obsessing about the mankad and not actually throwing deliveries down the pitch but if the non striker knows he could be throwing his wicket away it might stop them walking out of their crease as much.

If the bowler comes up with too many dead balls where he stops before bowling but doesn't run out the non striker then maybe start calling them no balls

The facing batsman can charge down the pitch before or as the ball is being bowled as far as he wants out of his crease and can start taking a run, heck he doesn't even need to hit the ball. We see this in one day games by tail enders or when a single is needed desperately to retain strike into the next over for example

The risk ofcourse is that you get stumped by the wicket keeper or if you cross with the non striker then he is run out. Should be same case down the non strikers end, actually it already is because there is a rule in place.
 

sharkafar

Bull Shark
Joined
May 22, 2009
Messages
2,018
Reaction score
128
Location
On the lam
Anyone watching the Border series on Kayo?

I didn't know Lillee and Marsh backed the Poms at 500/1 in a Test (after day 4) and we lost.
Really? That's always been a famous tale as I recall. Headingley 81. And that's all I have to say about that as that test series still gives me nightmares. :eek:
Is it worth a watch as a series though?
 
Last edited:

CrazyMatt

Jaws
Joined
Jul 31, 2010
Messages
22,978
Reaction score
2,607
Location
Colyton, Sydney
Sorry Uzzie, but thats the correct call. Cant afford to waste the time it would take for him to get those five runs which could be anything between 5-20 minutes, plus you’ve got the 15 minute switch over after the declaration. Nope, send them straight in and get every ball at them you possibly can.
 

HaroldBishop

Megalodon
Joined
Mar 8, 2012
Messages
54,673
Reaction score
7,386
Location
Sydney
Really? That's always been a famous tale as I recall. Headingley 81. And that's all I have to say about that as that test series still gives me nightmares. :eek:
Is it worth a watch as a series though?
If I've heard it I can't remember tbh.
 

sharkafar

Bull Shark
Joined
May 22, 2009
Messages
2,018
Reaction score
128
Location
On the lam
Was it Bill Lawry that declared when one of his batsman was a handful of runs from making his century and then Australia went on to lose or draw the test match anyway?

I think team first, milestones second but you would want to be fairly confident that the decision to declare is going to bring you a victory or you are seriously going to demoralize the batsman. I wonder if that batsman was given a message to hurry up cause captain Bill is going to pull you in soon
You may be thinking of Melbourne Ashes test 1971. We batted first and Lawry declared at 9/493. Rod Marsh was 92 n.o. playing in his 4th test. No guarantee he would have got there batting with the no. 11 I guess. Match ended up a draw.
 
Top