Topic: Australia vs India (Read 71291 times)

csnew · « **Reply #135 on:** December 17, 2018, 09:22:15 AM »

I�d say Nathan Lyon is the most important bowler in the Aussie line up. Probably the second best spinner in the world, fantastic control and dip.

SLA · « **Reply #136 on:** December 17, 2018, 09:53:11 AM »

Quote from: FattusCattus on December 16, 2018, 04:33:27 PM

People always do - he is dismissed as a 'clubbie', I think he's a fine bowler.

However, I believe many experts think he is more effective on Aussie pitched, do to his reliance on overspin.

Would he get in our side?

lol. yes. He'd have 100 caps. He's better than Swann.

SLA · « **Reply #137 on:** December 17, 2018, 09:54:28 AM »

Quote from: adb club cricketer on December 16, 2018, 04:25:01 PM

Ball clearly touched grass..I don't understand the finger underneath the ball rule, if the ball touched ground, it should be not out, though in this case it looked like the ball touched the ground and then rolled onto the finger. Soft signal rule is really crazy one for sure..

The grass is not the ground though. The ground is the hard stuff under the grass.

jayralh · « **Reply #138 on:** December 17, 2018, 10:05:25 AM »

Quote from: SLA on December 17, 2018, 09:54:28 AM

The grass is not the ground though. The ground is the hard stuff under the grass.

So in your opinion how long is the GRASS off the hard surface called ground.
And ball is heavy enough to touch grass and ground same time.

SLA · « **Reply #139 on:** December 17, 2018, 10:18:28 AM »

Quote from: jayralh on December 17, 2018, 10:05:25 AM

So in your opinion how long is the GRASS off the hard surface called ground.
And ball is heavy enough to touch grass and ground same time.

My point is that its perfectly possible for the ball to brush the top of the stems of grass on the way into the hand without ever touching the ground underneath. So just because you can see the ball touch the grass is not proof that it has also touched the ground.

jayralh · « **Reply #140 on:** December 17, 2018, 10:27:10 AM »

So if ball brushes faintest egde of bat rather than full face of bat and get caught is it out or not?
Opposite applies to that catch scenario.(not out)

LateBloomer · « **Reply #141 on:** December 17, 2018, 10:28:54 AM »

Is there any distinction between grass and ground in the laws of the game?

If so you could argue that in most cases the ball never truly touches the ground

mo_town · « **Reply #142 on:** December 17, 2018, 10:34:52 AM »

India missed a big trick by not picking a proper spinner. A spinner can be equally dangerous on a pitch with bounce and pace. Jadeja would have been deadly on this pitch.

mo_town · « **Reply #143 on:** December 17, 2018, 10:36:35 AM »

Quote from: jayralh on December 17, 2018, 10:05:25 AM

So in your opinion how long is the GRASS off the hard surface called ground.
And ball is heavy enough to touch grass and ground same time.

In my opinion, what is important is where did the ball bounce. That is touching the ground for me. Also with soft signals, I think it is out if the fielder claims it.

SLA · « **Reply #144 on:** December 17, 2018, 10:45:28 AM »

Quote from: LateBloomer on December 17, 2018, 10:28:54 AM

Is there any distinction between grass and ground in the laws of the game?

If so you could argue that in most cases the ball never truly touches the ground

It specifically mentions the ground, it never mentions the grass.

"The striker is out Caught if a ball delivered by the bowler, not being a No ball, touches his bat without having previously been in contact with any member of the fielding side and is subsequently held by a fielder as a fair catch before it touches the ground."

Just for clarity, here is the definition of ground: "the solid surface of the earth." and grass: "vegetation consisting of typically short plants with long, narrow leaves that grow on the ground"

LateBloomer · « **Reply #145 on:** December 17, 2018, 10:51:40 AM »

Quote from: SLA on December 17, 2018, 10:45:28 AM

It specifically mentions the ground, it never mentions the grass.

"The striker is out Caught if a ball delivered by the bowler, not being a No ball, touches his bat without having previously been in contact with any member of the fielding side and is subsequently held by a fielder as a fair catch before it touches the ground."

Just for clarity, here is the definition of ground: "the solid surface of the earth." and grass: "vegetation consisting of typically short plants with long, narrow leaves that grow on the ground"

I dont think you should confuse an overall description of the ground taken from a dictionary with what it might mean in a cricketing context.

With no distinction made in the cricketing laws I think we can take as given that the grass should be classed as part of the ground in all cricketing matters

SLA · « **Reply #146 on:** December 17, 2018, 11:23:26 AM »

Quote from: LateBloomer on December 17, 2018, 10:51:40 AM

I dont think you should confuse an overall description of the ground taken from a dictionary with what it might mean in a cricketing context.

With no distinction made in the cricketing laws I think we can take as given that the grass should be classed as part of the ground in all cricketing matters

Eh? Why on earth would we do that? That's daft and illogical. By definition, The grass is not the ground, so why would we pretend that it is. There is no argument in favour of re-defining the ground as being both the solid surface of the earth AND any crop or plant growing on top of it, either through deductive reasoning or matter of precedent.

People have been playing cricket for 100s of years, and the grass has never been considered part of the ground. If there was a particularly long 3 foot strand of grass sticking up in the air, and in taking a slip catch 2 foot off the ground, the ball brushed it on the way to your hand, are you honestly claiming that the ball "hit the ground" an thus you would tell the batsmen he was not out? People would laugh at you.

LateBloomer · « **Reply #147 on:** December 17, 2018, 11:51:22 AM »

Quote from: SLA on December 17, 2018, 11:23:26 AM

Eh? Why on earth would we do that? That's daft and illogical. By definition, The grass is not the ground, so why would we pretend that it is. There is no argument in favour of re-defining the ground as being both the solid surface of the earth AND any crop or plant growing on top of it, either through deductive reasoning or matter of precedent.

People have been playing cricket for 100s of years, and the grass has never been considered part of the ground. If there was a particularly long 3 foot strand of grass sticking up in the air, and in taking a slip catch 2 foot off the ground, the ball brushed it on the way to your hand, are you honestly claiming that the ball "hit the ground" an thus you would tell the batsmen he was not out? People would laugh at you.

Because as I said previously - if the grass and ground are considered different things in the sport of cricket then in most cases the ball never truly touches the ground. As there is always the grass surface seperating the ball from ever touching the soil.

So you could play a perfect cover drive along the grass and be given out caught at cover. Of course that doesnt happen, which is why the grass on the outfield should be and often is classed as part of the ground

Manormanic · « **Reply #148 on:** December 17, 2018, 12:10:24 PM »

Quote from: SLA on December 17, 2018, 09:53:11 AM

lol. yes. He'd have 100 caps. He's better than Swann.

err, if you're talking about Swann when he was still playing, then don't be ridiculous!

rickjames · « **Reply #149 on:** December 17, 2018, 12:33:39 PM »

Can't stop laughing https://streamable.com/ixbfo

Author Topic: Australia vs India (Read 71291 times)

csnew

Re: Australia vs India

SLA

Re: Australia vs India

SLA

Re: Australia vs India

jayralh

Re: Australia vs India

SLA

Re: Australia vs India

jayralh

Re: Australia vs India

LateBloomer

Re: Australia vs India

mo_town

Re: Australia vs India

mo_town

Re: Australia vs India

SLA

Re: Australia vs India

LateBloomer

Re: Australia vs India

SLA

Re: Australia vs India

LateBloomer

Re: Australia vs India

Manormanic

Re: Australia vs India

rickjames

Re: Australia vs India