Test match getting interesting - a fightback by England looked to have them in the box seat, but Duckett's wicket swings it back in Australia's favour - 179/5
And now Bairstow has gone - run out. I don't know why the crowd are booing - he walked out of his crease before waiting for the ball to go dead, so it was his own silly fault. Maybe they were booing him?
Aussies maybe didn’t withdraw the appeal after last night I suspect. Gamesmanship from them. We’d probably do the same.
There was no reason to withdraw the appeal - the keeper threw the stumps down as soon as he caught the ball, As a keeper himself, Bairstow should have known to wait instead of leaving the crease without a thought. Stokes doing his best to win it now - 107 not out. This could still go either way.
This fight back by England is quite ridiculous. No side should come back from the situation they got themselves into.
Bairstow made his mark. The square leg umpire wasn't watching, he thinks it's over. Bairstow should have waited perhaps but the appeal should have been withdrawn or overruled in the spirit of the game. One thing's for sure: had that gone against me then then the Convict would have been wearing my bat for a neck-tie. And yes, I played village cricket and umpired too.
Yes I saw Bairstow put his foot in the crease before walking out of it. A pity as the game may have gone down to the wire - it nearly did! England lost it in the first innings really, wasn't clever thinking by them.
That's not what I saw - Carey was standing well back, caught the ball and threw it at the stumps straight away - Bairstow was still in crease at that point, and the still live ball hit the wickets a fraction after he walked out - the umpire hadn't called over. That's what the third umpire ruled, and it's what the commentators each said when it happened too. To be honest, the term 'in the spirit of the game' flew out the window after Bodyline and has never returned since then - captains of both sides have regularly ignored it over the years.
My take on it is as follows. As Bairstow left the crease, the umpire at the far end was looking down fiddling with his gadgets. If he thought the ball was still in play, he should have been watching. There had been several previous chances like that, none of which were taken, before the last ball of the over. So Carey was accepting that the ball was 'dead' in the previous instances. 'In the spirit' of the game, Carey should have warned Bairstow , or complained to the umpire. I think he deliberately chose the last ball to avoid any confusion over 'dead ball'. Clever, but not good to see. (Any equivalence with Starc's catch last night is completely false. ) Having said all that, Bairstow owes his team a century and/or a mind-blowing performance behind the stumps - the sort of thing we would get from Foakes.
Stokes said he would have not appealed but in reality is that true ? Pressure and heat of the moment does funny things to the mind - particularly sports people.
Watch the replays through and you clearly see Bairstow make his mark with his foot behind the crease. Big long line. Umpire wasn't paying attention after that. Silly sod didn't ground his bat, nor wait, granted. Still well wide of acceptable for me. All duly noted for the next test, no doubt. Difficulty is that if you don't play cricket fairly then there's no point in playing at all. Indeed, it's just not cricket.
Australians are very much like Americans where sport is concerned, win a all costs and to hell with sportsmanship
The English are very much like that too - remember Flintoff in the Ashes test at Lords a few years back? Gave his fast bowlers regular rests by replacing them with substitute fielders and ignored Ricky Ponting's complaints. Not only against the 'spirit of the game' but actually against the rules too. As I said previously, any sense of fair play in the sport disappeared from both sides after the Bodyline series - and that was entirely down to England's captain, Douglas Jardine.
True. It's normal for teams to have periods where they are dominant over others and periods when they are less so - but they normally last for at least a couple of years. The last two Ashes Tests have seen that dominance swing from team to team repeatedly within each match - which makes for gripping viewing. I see that the media started stirring the pot by asking politicians if they thought "Australia was on the right path to behave the way they did." True to form, Lucy Fraser refused four times to give a straight answer, and Bob Blackman, MP for Harrow replied “They have been found guilty of cheating in the past" - apparently completely forgetting that so have England.
Watching the Scotland v Netherlands ICC match, I nearly snorted my coffee. With the Netherlands bowlers struggling to break a Scotland partnership, the Indian commentator asked the English commentator "What would you do if you had your Dutch cap on?" Complete silence followed...
Very much into "The batsman's Holding, the bowler's Willey" (comma's are important) and "couldn't quite get his leg over..." territory!
We’ve let the Aussies off big time at the moment . Typical that someone who hasn’t played for years scores a century !
