rjw63 Posted July 1, 2023 Share Posted July 1, 2023 Brook obviously not the second coming of Bradman that I was led to believe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaulC Posted July 1, 2023 Share Posted July 1, 2023 Nobody should get out to Head. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Avfc96 Posted July 1, 2023 Share Posted July 1, 2023 Just now, rjw63 said: Brook obviously not the second coming of Bradman that I was led to believe. I'd argue that Brook has shown he's a poor version of KP. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaulC Posted July 1, 2023 Share Posted July 1, 2023 2 minutes ago, rjw63 said: Brook obviously not the second coming of Bradman that I was led to believe. Yes lots of players make good starts to their test careers then get found out. Whatever happened to Gary Ballance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rjw63 Posted July 1, 2023 Share Posted July 1, 2023 2 minutes ago, PaulC said: Yes lots of players make good starts to their test careers then get found out. Whatever happened to Gary Ballance. He lost it 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theunderstudy Posted July 1, 2023 Share Posted July 1, 2023 Another brain dead sky to a boundary fielder. Duckett realises he can hit the ball along the ground right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theunderstudy Posted July 1, 2023 Share Posted July 1, 2023 Survives thanks to Starc dragging it along the floor. The catch rule needs to be no contact with the floor at all or the catch is grounded. This whole "fingers partially under the ball" is nonsense 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sidcow Posted July 1, 2023 VT Supporter Share Posted July 1, 2023 (edited) 3 minutes ago, theunderstudy said: Survives thanks to Starc dragging it along the floor. The catch rule needs to be no contact with the floor at all or the catch is grounded. This whole "fingers partially under the ball" is nonsense It's a bit of nonsense though. He was totally in control of the ball, both hands around it, the catch was complete. He wasn't then in charge of his body so he had to stabilise his body or injure himself. It's like saying no catch if a player throws the ball high in the air in celebration after a successful catch and fails to catch it again. Edited July 1, 2023 by sidcow Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaulC Posted July 1, 2023 Share Posted July 1, 2023 Difficult one but I'm glad it went our way. Duckett deserved a break he's played well both innings 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KentVillan Posted July 1, 2023 Share Posted July 1, 2023 8 minutes ago, sidcow said: It's a bit of nonsense though. He was totally in control of the ball, both hands around it, the catch was complete. He wasn't then in charge of his body so he had to stabilise his body or injure himself. It's like saying no catch if a player throws the ball high in the air in celebration after a successful catch and fails to catch it again. Think this is the rule though if the player throws it before having it under control? Vaguely remember a SA fielder doing this in the 90s or early 2000s … Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaulC Posted July 1, 2023 Share Posted July 1, 2023 I always thought that if you throe the ball up in the air you are in control of the ball but if you catch it and you fall to the ground yet you don't have fingers under the ball and ball touches ground not out. Ponting moaning about it but then hes biased. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bannedfromHandV Posted July 1, 2023 Share Posted July 1, 2023 (edited) 36 minutes ago, sidcow said: It's a bit of nonsense though. He was totally in control of the ball, both hands around it, the catch was complete. He wasn't then in charge of his body so he had to stabilise his body or injure himself. It's like saying no catch if a player throws the ball high in the air in celebration after a successful catch and fails to catch it again. I actually think it was the right decision, the catch is the whole motion including (if you’re diving) the going to ground bit, he dragged the ball clearly along the ground with no fingers underneath so not out for me, and that’s not being biased. Edited July 1, 2023 by bannedfromHandV 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Milfner Posted July 1, 2023 Author Share Posted July 1, 2023 I wouldn't have had too many complaints had it been given out to be honest. Did feel like a bit of a make up call after the Root dismissal in the first innings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Only2McInallys Posted July 1, 2023 Share Posted July 1, 2023 I naively thought if you rub the ball along the ground it was not out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaulC Posted July 1, 2023 Share Posted July 1, 2023 11 minutes ago, Only2McInallys said: I naively thought if you rub the ball along the ground it was not out. Me too. It would have really confused things if given out imo. Like the handball rule in football Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaulC Posted July 1, 2023 Share Posted July 1, 2023 (edited) 26 minutes ago, Milfner said: I wouldn't have had too many complaints had it been given out to be honest. Did feel like a bit of a make up call after the Root dismissal in the first innings. Don't know, the Root one he clearly had his hand under the ball not over the ball like Stark Edited July 1, 2023 by PaulC 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobzy Posted July 1, 2023 Share Posted July 1, 2023 1 hour ago, sidcow said: It's a bit of nonsense though. He was totally in control of the ball, both hands around it, the catch was complete. He wasn't then in charge of his body so he had to stabilise his body or injure himself. It's like saying no catch if a player throws the ball high in the air in celebration after a successful catch and fails to catch it again. Disagree. In the latter given here, a player would be control of themselves and the ball at point of catching, so they're able to throw it up in the air. Everything in control. Starc has the ball in his hands, but is still in the catching motion (as it were) and can't complete it properly. He can't throw the ball in celebration or do anything with it, because he's not in control. If a ball was slogged and momentarily caught by a player who spilled the ball as they stumbled backwards, then they aren't in control and it'd be not out. This is the same thing. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sharkyvilla Posted July 1, 2023 Share Posted July 1, 2023 You need to be in control of your body and the ball, he was still sliding when the ball was in contact with the ground so seems a pretty simple 'not out' for me. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villaglint Posted July 1, 2023 Share Posted July 1, 2023 (edited) 31 minutes ago, sharkyvilla said: You need to be in control of your body and the ball, he was still sliding when the ball was in contact with the ground so seems a pretty simple 'not out' for me. Agreed didn’t see it in real time but watching the clip not sure what the fuss is all about. Imagine he’s in the slips and catches the ball and then slides the ball along along the ground. Not a catch. Edited July 1, 2023 by villaglint 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KentVillan Posted July 1, 2023 Share Posted July 1, 2023 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts