Trans Tasman Trophy

[whufc]

How can you find Smith boring to watch? His batting in The Ashes was on another planet.

Agree with others on Wagner, if he bowled that medium pace short rubbish to Hayden, Ponting, Gilchrist etc he'd be laughed out of the country.

You answered your own question
For the supposed next best to Bradman he is a long way off even handling Wagner, a 130km/hr trundler, how many of them did England roll out against us in the 90s and 00s?
#unwatchable

Take a look how much better Smith has handled spin especially in India which arguably an Australian batsmen biggest test.

Steve Smith in India averages 60
Ponting in India averaged 26
Gilchrist in India averaged 28
Hayden in India averaged 51

All batsmen have some sort of deficiency even take Hayden. In the three countries that seam the most England, NZ, SAF Hayden averaged 38,24,38 respectively which is bang average, infect below par

[Jim05]

Raval pulls a “Watto” and reviews one he should have walked to!

[Jim05]

Two balls later Latham gives up his wicket with a terribly soft dismissal

[The Dark Knight]

Couple of quick wickets-
Raval LBW to Lyon, reviewed it even though he was absolutely plumb! What a f**king waste of a review, unless he thought he inside edged it.
Latham out caught chipping it to mid on off Cummins, soft dismissal after he batted well.

[stampy]

******* pattinson, does he ever learn ffs.....

[locky801]

******* pattinson, does he ever learn ffs.....

plus he bowled pies today been woeful

[Jim05]

******* pattinson, does he ever learn ffs.....

Just showed on the TV that 5 of his previous 12 balls were also no balls that weren’t picked up

[locky801]

******* pattinson, does he ever learn ffs.....

Just showed on the TV that 5 of his previous 12 balls were also no balls that weren’t picked up

This missing of no balls is getting ridiculous, in the England/South African test last night Paul Reiffel missed 8 no balls in about half an hour according to the commentators, either review every bloody ball or none at all

[The Dark Knight]

NZ 9/249.
Good fight by them, their longest innings of the series by far facing 95 overs but they still trail by 205.
Lyon 4/66, seeking his first test match five wicket haul at the SCG and first five fa against NZ.

[The Dark Knight]

And there it is Gaz takes 5, Henry out stumped. NZ all out for 251, trail by 203.

[Dutchy]

And there it is Gaz takes 5, Henry out stumped. NZ all out for 251, trail by 203.

I dont understand how that dismissal is stumped when Henry hit the delivery? Its a run out IMO

[Brodlach]

And there it is Gaz takes 5, Henry out stumped. NZ all out for 251, trail by 203.

I dont understand how that dismissal is stumped when Henry hit the delivery? Its a run out IMO

Wasn’t attempting a run

[Dutchy]

stupid rule, how does a bowler get a stumping when they hit it!

[RB]

That's always been the rule.

Not sure why the bowler shouldn't get the credit - it was the batsman missing (or merely edging) the delivery which led to him being caught out of his ground, rather than a run out which doesn't have anything to do with the delivery.

Of course in the reverse situation, where the batsmen misses it and attempts to run a bye but he or his partner gets run out, it would make no sense for the bowler to get credit for a 'stumping' because it wasn't really his delivery that caused the dismissal.

[Dutchy]

So if you knick the ball to 1st slip and he throws down the stumps that's a stumping also?

[RB]

Nope, that's a run out. Only the keeper can make a stumping.

If first slip fields and knocks your stumps down and you're out of your ground you're almost certainly attempting a run though; the dismissal wouldn't be as a result of your being beaten by the bowler.

[jackpot jim]

Nope, that's a run out. Only the keeper can make a stumping.

If first slip fields and knocks your stumps down and you're out of your ground you're almost certainly attempting a run though; the dismissal wouldn't be as a result of your being beaten by the bowler.

David Hookes threw the stumps down from 1st slip to dismiss Dean Jones in a Shield match back in the 1980s
From memory Jones used to bat a fair way out of his crease, Hookes planned it with the bowler and keeper to bowl a wide ball outside off stump and Hookes took the ball instesd of the keeper and threw the stumps down in a flash before Jones even realized what was going on.
I can only assume it was given out Run Out tho i guess there could be an argument it was Stumped. Matters not i guess as it was Out and Deano had a sook about it whilst walking off

[jackpot jim]

******* pattinson, does he ever learn ffs.....

Just showed on the TV that 5 of his previous 12 balls were also no balls that weren’t picked up

This missing of no balls is getting ridiculous, in the England/South African test last night Paul Reiffel missed 8 no balls in about half an hour according to the commentators, either review every bloody ball or none at all

Broad missed out on a wicket last night after over stepping by about 3 inches
Just begs the question about how stupid, dumb or unprofessional these blokes are and their coaches not to sort this shit out?
Its just ridiculous how some bowlers just push the line every single ball and when they do get a wicket, everyone holds their breath to see if it was a no ball

[Dutchy]

Nope, that's a run out. Only the keeper can make a stumping.

If first slip fields and knocks your stumps down and you're out of your ground you're almost certainly attempting a run though; the dismissal wouldn't be as a result of your being beaten by the bowler.

That makes even less sense then. Makes no difference if its keeper or 1st slip who hits the stumps

[RB]

I think it makes sense that the bowler gets the credit if he beats you (even where you edge it) and you get caught out of your ground. The dismissal is as a result of you playing forward and missing (or at least not middling) the ball.

The Lyon one today was no different than if the batsman was off by another centimetre and totally missed it - either way it's the delivery beating the batsman that led to the wicket. Would be the same if it had nicked his pad instead of the bat.

A bit weird that it's only a stumping if it's the keeper but it would be extremely rare that first slip has enough time to throw you out but you didn't intend to run.