Ashes Second Test

[Casper2]

If cricket isn't elitist then why is it only a case of who you know to get membership of the MCC.

Plus there was a report released literally a few days ago saying exactly that .

[ClaretTony]

There’s a long waiting list I think to become a member of the MCC but it seems high profile people get in very quickly.

[arise_sir_charge]

I thought the Sky commentary team completely misread the room in respect of the Bairstow incident. They seemed to be at pains to try and make it a none event when it was claret that the England team and the crowd were appalled by it,

I had TMS on when it happened and they were pretty unanimous in the view that it was very poor on the Part of Cummins and Carey.

[JohnDearyMe]

It was only £25 to get in today making it affordable to the great unwashed

Prices for normal seats for the first 4 days were in excess of £100. Good thing there's not a cost of living crisis!

[ClaretTony]

I thought the Sky commentary team completely misread the room in respect of the Bairstow incident. They seemed to be at pains to try and make it a none event when it was claret that the England team and the crowd were appalled by it,

I had TMS on when it happened and they were pretty unanimous in the view that it was very poor on the Part of Cummins and Carey.

Bumble has just been talking about it. Although he said the rules confirm he’s out, had he been captain he’d have brought Bairstow back.

[RVclaret]

I thought the Sky commentary team completely misread the room in respect of the Bairstow incident. They seemed to be at pains to try and make it a none event when it was claret that the England team and the crowd were appalled by it,

I had TMS on when it happened and they were pretty unanimous in the view that it was very poor on the Part of Cummins and Carey.

Fully agree with this. I was stunned by the summary on Sky.

[dandeclaret]

Ticket prices for the first 4 days at Lords were extremely expensive. Gets worse every year

Attended day 1 this year, the tickets were £180 each, which is very pricey for a day of sport . Although, it is the only sporting ground that you’re allowed to take in your own bottle of wine or champagne, or 2 pints of beer or cider.

Enjoyed the experience, would go again. Very different to a day at Old Trafford / Edgbaston / Nottingham / Leeds

[dandeclaret]

Bumble has just been talking about it. Although he said the rules confirm he’s out, had he been captain he’d have brought Bairstow back.

Stokes and McCullum have both said the same.

[jrgbfc]

It's very easy to say it. If the boot was on the other foot most England fans would be saying it was clever play.

[ClaretTony]

Team for Thursday is from the team who played this test plus Mooen, Lawrence, Wood & Woakes.

[Newcastleclaret93]

Team for Thursday is from the team who played this test plus Mooen, Lawrence, Wood & Woakes.

Really disappointed Hain isn’t even in the squad

[Ric_C]

Nothing amazing at all, just look how long was left when they won it. Just requires some common sense and a knowledge of the game.

I'm not so sure, 50 more runs for England would have given us the luxury of more attacking fields on the last day. In hindsight it was a poor call

[kentonclaret]

It's very easy to say it. If the boot was on the other foot most England fans would be saying it was clever play.

Ollie Pope dismissed Colin de Grandhomme of NZ at Lords in June 2022 in very similar circumstances and did not withdraw their appeal. The Egg and Bacon were not spitting fat out of the frying pan on that occasion. Just a case of the biter getting bit in this instance.

[Bordeauxclaret]

Ollie Pope dismissed Colin de Grandhomme of NZ at Lords in June 2022 in very similar circumstances and did not withdraw their appeal. The Egg and Bacon were not spitting fat out of the frying pan on that occasion. Just a case of the biter getting bit in this instance.

It wasn’t similar at all.
De Grandhomme was looking for a single and was run out trying to get back in.

[taio]

It wasn’t similar at all.
De Grandhomme was looking for a single and was run out trying to get back in.

When Sky showed it earlier I thought it wasn't the best comparison

[RVclaret]

Ollie Pope dismissed Colin de Grandhomme of NZ at Lords in June 2022 in very similar circumstances and did not withdraw their appeal. The Egg and Bacon were not spitting fat out of the frying pan on that occasion. Just a case of the biter getting bit in this instance.

Completely different circumstances but yeah good point

[Newcastleclaret93]

Ollie Pope dismissed Colin de Grandhomme of NZ at Lords in June 2022 in very similar circumstances and did not withdraw their appeal. The Egg and Bacon were not spitting fat out of the frying pan on that occasion. Just a case of the biter getting bit in this instance.

That was not even remotely comparable? A player edging to slip and being out of his crease because of the shot is completely different to what happened to Bairstow

[Casper2]

Stokes and McCullum have both said the same.

Common theme is that none of them are Aussies

[Milltown1882]

Really disappointed Hain isn’t even in the squad

He’s out of contract at the end of the season, no doubt a trip to Surrey will gift him a one way ticket to all three formats.

[claretspice]

It wasn’t similar at all.
De Grandhomme was looking for a single and was run out trying to get back in.

I don't think that is right re De Grandhomme. He wasnt looking for a single, he wasn't sure where the ball had gone and was distracted by the appeal and so didn't know he was out of his ground. It's the fact he didn't know he was out of his ground and that the ball was live that is the point of comparison.

I think Bairstow was out, and fairly. The ball wasn't dead and the batter doesn't get to choose when it is dead - either the umpire does or the fielder/keeper triggers it by the way they deal with the ball. Carey didn't wait in a sneaky way - he threw it back immediately. Its exactly as per a conventional stumping and Bairstow was dozy. In League cricket, particularly at lower levels when keepers aren't comfortable standing right up, that sort of dismissal is tried for and sometimes got every weekend.

[BennyD]

It's very easy to say it. If the boot was on the other foot most England fans would be saying it was clever play.

Wrong. It was very unsporting whoever perpetrated it.

[Carwin261]

Wrong. It was very unsporting whoever perpetrated it.

How can it be unsporting ? the wicket keeper threw it at the stumps automatically,people should just admit Bairstow was a numpty ,no more unsporting than when England won the World Cup with an overthrow,and what about Broad refusing to walk when he obviously nicked the ball,England are no more,or no less sporting than any other nation.

[TheFamilyCat]

Stokes and McCullum have both said the same.

Stokes didn't say that in the interview I've seen.

[TheFamilyCat]

How can it be unsporting ? the wicket keeper threw it at the stumps automatically,people should just admit Bairstow was a numpty ,no more unsporting than when England won the World Cup with an overthrow,and what about Broad refusing to walk when he obviously nicked the ball,England are no more,or no less sporting than any other nation.

Although I agree that it was a fair dismissal, I don't think the WC final is an example of poor sportsmanship. That was a complete fluke and I don't think there's anything England could have done in response. I'm pretty sure a captain can't ask for runs to not be counted.

[Lancasterclaret]

From what I can gather, another enthralling day of cricket (been out in the fells all day)

I do hope that this doesn't detract some hard thinking about the bits of the test that England didn't do well though

[Bordeauxclaret]

I don't think that is right re De Grandhomme. He wasnt looking for a single, he wasn't sure where the ball had gone and was distracted by the appeal and so didn't know he was out of his ground. It's the fact he didn't know he was out of his ground and that the ball was live that is the point of comparison.

He was. Look how far down he gets himself.
If he didn’t know he was out of his ground then why did he make an effort to get back????

There is no comparison whatsoever.

https://twitter.com/englandcricket/stat ... ILaegOU2yQ

[arise_sir_charge]

I don't think that is right re De Grandhomme. He wasnt looking for a single, he wasn't sure where the ball had gone and was distracted by the appeal and so didn't know he was out of his ground. It's the fact he didn't know he was out of his ground and that the ball was live that is the point of comparison.

I think Bairstow was out, and fairly. The ball wasn't dead and the batter doesn't get to choose when it is dead - either the umpire does or the fielder/keeper triggers it by the way they deal with the ball. Carey didn't wait in a sneaky way - he threw it back immediately. Its exactly as per a conventional stumping and Bairstow was dozy. In League cricket, particularly at lower levels when keepers aren't comfortable standing right up, that sort of dismissal is tried for and sometimes got every weekend.

You see this is where I disagree.

In league cricket, those type of dismissals are when the player is batting out of his crease and stays out of his crease. The fact Bairstow plays the ball, comes out of his stance, turns and marks his mark again makes its incomparable to those incidents. In fact in league cricket today’s incident couldn’t be given out as neither umpire was watching, both making moves towards either giving the bowler his hat back or walking up towards the stumps for the next over.

As for the DeGrandhomme one, there is no comparison at all.

[boatshed bill]

How can it be unsporting ? the wicket keeper threw it at the stumps automatically,people should just admit Bairstow was a numpty ,no more unsporting than when England won the World Cup with an overthrow,and what about Broad refusing to walk when he obviously nicked the ball,England are no more,or no less sporting than any other nation.

As I see it, if the umpire hasn't called "over" then Bairstow is out.. no question.

[CrosspoolClarets]

It's very easy to say it. If the boot was on the other foot most England fans would be saying it was clever play.

Unsure if this has been mentioned, not had time to read the earlier pages, but England chose not to time out Lyon when he came slowly out to bat. They were entitled, but good sportsmanship meant they didn’t. So I think that answers what they would have done if the shoe was on the other foot.

[dandeclaret]

Stokes didn't say that in the interview I've seen.

"Speaking to Sky Sports after the second Test, Stokes explained: 'For me I was asking the umpires if they had said 'over' and they said 'no' but the square leg umpire and the standing umpire made the movements towards it being over. 'Look, at the end of the day, it's out. I think if the shoe was on the other foot I would probably just have to have a little think around the whole spirit of the game and things like that.

[dandeclaret]

He was. Look how far down he gets himself.
If he didn’t know he was out of his ground then why did he make an effort to get back????

There is no comparison whatsoever.

https://twitter.com/englandcricket/stat ... ILaegOU2yQ

Agreew fully with you BC... Bairstow stood in the crease, scratched his foot before walking down to talk to Stokes, as the umpires walked from their positions. De Grandhomme was hit on his legs, and kept on moving down the pitch - never being in his ground.

Brad Hogg (former Aussie keeper) and Paul Nixon (Long serving wicket keeper) have both said that they think that the second in the crease shows the respect the keeper expects, and that they don't think there should have been an appeal.

[Clockwork Claret]

Hey knew exactly where the ball was. Utter tripe this.

I don't think that is right re De Grandhomme. He wasnt looking for a single, he wasn't sure where the ball had gone and was distracted by the appeal and so didn't know he was out of his ground. It's the fact he didn't know he was out of his ground and that the ball was live that is the point of comparison.

I think Bairstow was out, and fairly. The ball wasn't dead and the batter doesn't get to choose when it is dead - either the umpire does or the fielder/keeper triggers it by the way they deal with the ball. Carey didn't wait in a sneaky way - he threw it back immediately. Its exactly as per a conventional stumping and Bairstow was dozy. In League cricket, particularly at lower levels when keepers aren't comfortable standing right up, that sort of dismissal is tried for and sometimes got every weekend.

[Eyesofblue2]

Perhaps he is, but no other team would have done that.

Well maybe, maybe not, but one thing is certain, the one team that will do it is Australia, and Bairstow has been around long enough to be aware of that.

[claretspice]

You see this is where I disagree.

In league cricket, those type of dismissals are when the player is batting out of his crease and stays out of his crease. The fact Bairstow plays the ball, comes out of his stance, turns and marks his mark again makes its incomparable to those incidents. In fact in league cricket today’s incident couldn’t be given out as neither umpire was watching, both making moves towards either giving the bowler his hat back or walking up towards the stumps for the next over.

As for the DeGrandhomme one, there is no comparison at all.

Bairstow marks his ground *after* Carey had rolled it back. Which is exactly why the ball was not dead. And no, those dismissals do not just occur in club cricket when someone is batting out of their ground, they occur when a batter goes for an unexplained walk about immediately the ball has gone past them, when they over balance to leg side balls, and so on.

[ClaretLoup]

Three MCC members suspended for sledging the Aussie players in the Long Room.

[arise_sir_charge]

Bairstow marks his ground *after* Carey had rolled it back. Which is exactly why the ball was not dead. And no, those dismissals do not just occur in club cricket when someone is batting out of their ground, they occur when a batter goes for an unexplained walk about immediately the ball has gone past them, when they over balance to leg side balls, and so on.

No he doesn’t. I think you need to watch what Bairstow does again.

I played cricket for 20 years and I watch club cricket every single weekend in the summer and I’ve never seen anyone stumped in the same manner as Bairstow was today.

[TheFamilyCat]

"Speaking to Sky Sports after the second Test, Stokes explained: 'For me I was asking the umpires if they had said 'over' and they said 'no' but the square leg umpire and the standing umpire made the movements towards it being over. 'Look, at the end of the day, it's out. I think if the shoe was on the other foot I would probably just have to have a little think around the whole spirit of the game and things like that.

As I said, Stokes hasn't said he'd have called the batter back.

[Goody1975]

Three MCC members suspended for sledging the Aussie players in the Long Room.

I'm sure if they go on TV and put on the waterworks then they'll be allowed back soon enough.

[Bordeauxclaret]

As I said, Stokes hasn't said he'd have called the batter back.

He told Agnew on the BBC he would have withdrawn the appeal.

[Claretincraven]

Three MCC members suspended for sledging the Aussie players in the Long Room.

Will be an interesting reception for them on Thursday.
If Khawaja thought the MCC members were disrespectful I hope he has a thick skin.
Having seen the video of the players walking through the Long Room at lunch it seemed to me the whinging Aussies creating most of the fuss, one even coming back out to have another go.

[ClaretLoup]

The utter irony of Aussies complaining about sledging.

[Dark Cloud]

I played the game in local leagues for 35 years and although strictly speaking the ball is still "live" after each delivery, even when it's being thrown around the fielders back to the bowler, nobody attempts to stump or run out a batter who has been in his ground following a delivery and then left it to either "garden" on the pitch or have a talk with his partner. It's obvious the batter is not attempting to run and there's a tacit understanding from everyone that in those circumstances he's free to wander. It's irrelevant (imo) that in Bairstow's case it's actually the last ball of the over, but the umpire hasn't yet called it over. He's doing nothing a chap wouldn't do on any other ball and yet Australia saw a way to get someone out by SUDDENLY resorting to applying a rule which I've never seen used or applied before either playing or watching in 65 years and that tells you everything about this I feel.

[boatshed bill]

Hasn't the 'keeper kept the ball alive and in play?
had he missed the stumps our batsmen could have taken a run.

[claretspice]

I played the game in local leagues for 35 years and although strictly speaking the ball is still "live" after each delivery, even when it's being thrown around the fielders back to the bowler, nobody attempts to stump or run out a batter who has been in his ground following a delivery and then left it to either "garden" on the pitch or have a talk with his partner. It's obvious the batter is not attempting to run and there's a tacit understanding from everyone that in those circumstances he's free to wander. It's irrelevant (imo) that in Bairstow's case it's actually the last ball of the over, but the umpire hasn't yet called it over. He's doing nothing a chap wouldn't do on any other ball and yet Australia saw a way to get someone out by SUDDENLY resorting to applying a rule which I've never seen used or applied before either playing or watching in 65 years and that tells you everything about this I feel.

You shouldn't leave your ground until the Conduct of the fielding side suggests they are treating the ball as dead. If you do, you do it at your risk. If a batsman vacantly leaves his ground after completing a run and the throw comes in and hits the stumps, he's run out regardless of the fact it may be absent minded rather than an attempt to steal a run. It's exactly the same principle. Bairstow has to make sure the keeper is not treating the ball as live before going walk about. He didn't, and he paid the price.

[clansman]

Some twitter comments quite funny
“Kawaja offers out 93 year old Tory”
“You know it’s kicked off badly when the Long Room is like Millwall away”!

[dandeclaret]

What a fabulous addition to the sport it will be if we slow it down so batters not trying to gain an advantage can check with each fielder and umpire that the ball is dead Before they go and garden or chat with the other batter….. who said that test cricket is dead eh? This fascinating application of the minutiae of the laws will get them flocking in.

[claretspice]

What a fabulous addition to the sport it will be if we slow it down so batters not trying to gain an advantage can check with each fielder and umpire that the ball is dead Before they go and garden or chat with the other batter….. who said that test cricket is dead eh? This fascinating application of the minutiae of the laws will get them flocking in.

Noone needs to question anything Dan. But the acts of the keeper/fielders/bowler have always dictated whether the ball is dead. The onus is just on the batter to be aware of that. Had Carey thrown to a fielder who had then thrown down the stumps - completely different. Had Carey acted in a way which suggested he treated the ball as dead - different. But Bairstow just took it upon himself to decree when the ball is dead, and it's never been the batsman's perogative.

The reason this doesn't happen much is that batters don't leave their crease until the ball is clearly dead.

[dandeclaret]

Noone needs to question anything Dan. But the acts of the keeper/fielders/bowler have always dictated whether the ball is dead. The onus is just on the batter to be aware of that. Had Carey thrown to a fielder who had then thrown down the stumps - completely different. Had Carey acted in a way which suggested he treated the ball as dead - different. But Bairstow just took it upon himself to decree when the ball is dead, and it's never been the batsman's perogative.

The reason this doesn't happen much is that batters don't leave their crease until the ball is clearly dead.

Are you certain on the last point? Or has it just not been noticed? Or is it circumstantial to this game? With so many short balls and the keeper well back? File it alongside mankads and under arm
Bowling…. In the laws, but not in the spirit. If Burnley, England or Lancs did what happened today, or any of the above, I’d be very disappointed in them.

[claretspice]

Are you certain on the last point? Or has it just not been noticed? Or is it circumstantial to this game? With so many short balls and the keeper well back? File it alongside mankads and under arm
Bowling…. In the laws, but not in the spirit. If Burnley, England or Lancs did what happened today, or any of the above, I’d be very disappointed in them.

I'm certain at the level i've played, Dan. Most batters check whether the ball has started to go round the field before leaving their ground.And if the fielding side notice a batter going walk about after playing the ball, or not retreating if they're batting outside the ground, then they notice it and might well try and exploit it - whether the keeper is standing up or back.

It might be that the professionals aren't as diligent about this as the amateurs in the leagues I've played in, but i'd be surprised. I've just watched Michael Vaughan observe that in the 3 balls running up to the incident, and the ball itself, Bairstow didn't once look round and check with the keeper. That suggests that Vaughan thinks its normal for pros to do it. Atherton, Hussain, Strauss and Morgan all took a similar view on Sky. I think that's quite telling.

[CoolClaret]

It’s really poor from Carey - there’s no two ways about it.

It’s compeltely different to a Mankad because Bairstow is not looking to score at all.

These are sort of gray areas that are we shouldn’t be being totally picky about and the reason that keepers don’t Chuck the ball at the stump every time and instead pass the ball around the field is because it would make the game a lot slower and more annoying…

The fact Bairstow emphasises putting his foot down and re digs his mark only adds to the fact that he’s indicating that he’s in his crease and sort of signalling that the ball is dead - even both umps are looking away.

The Aussies have stained that game imo. If that’s how they want to play then I would hope our lads properly over emphasise the rules and look for any mankads etc possible.