two pricks at the ashes: sydney day 3

Tagged ,

11 thoughts on “two pricks at the ashes: sydney day 3

  1. Hitesh says:

    Really loved your ashes episodes you pricks…. especially the monologue on this one…praise is due here, takes a bloody lot of effort with the editing…..hope you’ll come together and make something for the world cup..

  2. martin says:

    Im glad that Bell got the monkey off his back by making it to three figures against Australia. What has confused me tho is the referral. From what I understand, the umpire gave it out, Bell appealed against it, the third umpire in conversation with the Umpire on the field seemed to suggest that it was his decision to make. There didnt appear to be strong evidence that a wrong decision had been made, rather an absence of confirmation either way. I had understood that in this situation the original decision would be upheld yet the umpire reversed his own decision for no real reason as far as I can tell.
    I wonder about this technological stuff. Perhaps I am an anachronism but I believe cricket’s integrity hinges on players accepting the authority of the Umpires on the field. Now that new technologies have been introduced (which, incidentally, do not appear to be infallible either) along with the concept of appeals to the third umpire to review decisions, then that authority is undermined. Moreover if the purpose of the referrals process is to try to eradicate the bad decision then why are there limits to its use?
    In the first test England used up their second appeal unsuccessfully appealing for a catch so could not ask for a referral when the umpire then missed what looked to be a plumb LBW. Where is the sense in this?

  3. Christopher says:

    I think, Martin, that once you have introduced the technology if there is then no limit to it’s use, the on field umpire is redundant. To my knowledge the idea was that teams would only refer blatantly wrong decisions therefore a limit of 2 per innings seemed reasonable. Obviously the will to win is great and teams often use their referals willy nilly, it could be said that it’s then their own problem that they can’t later refer the bad decision having previously refered out of hope/desperation.

    Jrod you’re right about the walking/appealing rubbish; nobody gives a toss. I was listening to the Sky commentry in the UK when Hughes ‘took’ the catch and Botham went mental, you could hear the anger in his voice. He later kicked off about Aussie’s not clapping or congratulating Cook on his century at which point I went to bed and therefore missed ‘Bellgate’, thankfully.

  4. steve says:

    I see the Poms are now calling Hughes a cheat, no doubt to distract from having to admit that Bell got his 100 by rorting the system himself, since Dar and the Snickometer, and Bell, no doubt, heard the sound of his nick.

  5. Christopher says:

    Not ‘the poms’ just beefy. Certainly not this pom anyways.

  6. Dexter says:

    Regarding the Ian Bell dismissal, if nothing appearing on HotSpot is not enough to say the ball did not hit the edge despite passing close to it, then what exactly is?

    If you’ve been given out and genuinely not hit it how will the UDRS determine this is the lack of proof in the technology is not enough to over-turn an incorrect decision. (Not saying Ian Bell didn’t hit it yesterday, this is just looking at it hypothetically)

  7. I don’t normally agree with Botham, but I do this time.

    Cheat is probably too strong, but you can clearly see Hughes put his hands up in disappointment, before changing to celebration. Thats not the actions of a man asking the umpire for a review.

    I also don’t really see what Bell did wrong. It was the interpretation that was wrong. But Bell should have gone, I agree.

    But does anybody seriously think that Bell would have reviewed had he knew he hit it? Only an idiot would do that. And if he did, he is a very lucky idiot. But I just don’t buy that one.

    That he thought, “oh, maybe my edge might not have been picked up by hotspot, I think I’ll try a review just in case”

    Do me a favour!

    Australia have had no luck with reviews, but that dosen’t mean the whole of world cricket is conspiring against them.

  8. Bottom Edge says:

    @Hitesh – seconded, I would love to see Two Pricks at the World Cup. This has been one of the best things about the whole damn series.

    • jrod says:

      Hitesh & Bottom edge, Probably won’t happen this world cup, but I doubt this will be the last time you’ll see two pricks.

  9. Miriam says:

    Yay I like it when they end with a song.

  10. Mike Baby says:

    Well done England, you deserved it.

Comments are closed.