Certified Legendary Thread 4th Test Border Gavaskar Trophy December 26-30 1000hrs @ the MCG

[Rowd072]

Always backfires. Just went too early with this Siraj

 

[western royboy]

So not out?? Or out??

Out

 

[western royboy]

What was the actual crowd on day 5?

74k

 

[ElliottsMaggies]

What was the actual crowd on day 5?

74,362

https://www.news.com.au/sport/cricket/donald-bradman-era-record-shattered-as-fans-flock-to-mcg/news-story/d7acbfe097dd8573e0f9def2f3435dfb

 

[nobbyiscool]

What's a decent hotel to stay in Sydney to watch a day up there?

Asking for a friend.

Make sure you check the weather before you get too carried away!

 

[Pakenhamsaint]

Just watching the highlights I'll tell you what Joel Wilson even Stevie Wonder could do you job.

 

[Pakenhamsaint]

Make sure you check the weather before you get too carried away!

I will happily sit in the rain if its means we win the trophy!

 

[Trojan90]

Out

 

[Mr Meow]

So not out?? Or out??

You've had zero support from your three nominated experts. Two definitive outs, while one simply said to not interact with you.

Seems fairly conclusive to me.

 

[HK_Hawk]

Bahahahahaha….

 

[Mister B]

"Arguing"? Once again, that's just a negative judgement based on assumption. Even if he was disputing the call, did he break any rules that warrant him being labelled a "cheat" by so many numpties?

Yes. When you are given out, the rules state you are out and you leave the field. You don't stand there arguing with a \nd berating the umpires. Get off the ****ing field. Simple.

 

[dogs105]

You've had zero support from your three nominated experts. Two definitive outs, while one simply said to not interact with you.

Seems fairly conclusive to me.

Could ask the Indian captain:

" Speaking at the post-match press conference, Rohit admitted that while Snicko didn't indicate a spike, the visual evidence suggested otherwise. "It didn't show in Snicko, but with the naked eye, there was a clear deflection," Rohit said. "In all fairness, it looked like he touched it. "

 

[HitTheNailOnTheHead]

Jaiswal was very lucky to get as many runs as he did. He was clearly out earlier as you mentioned but he played and missed at least 12 times to Starc and 9 times to others before that. Missed getting a nick by a bees dick on many of those occasions so he should feel very fortunate. Something in his expression or actions straight after Cummins went for the review delighted Cummins as if he knew he was going to be given out. Changed his tune when he saw the almost perfectly flatlined snicko but I heard a noise real time as the ball was passing him.

Update.

After seeing the video below, I now know what Cummins saw.

Cummins: "As soon as we referred it you could see him drop his head basically acknowledging he hit it".

 

[KBLT]

'Virat Kohli will play for 3-4 years but Rohit Sharma...' - Ravi Shastri's assessment of India batting duo's Test cricket future | Sporting News India

Rohit Sharma and Virat Kohli failed to score big again in the fourth Test of the series with a huge target to be chased on the final day. See what Ravi Shastri thinks about the future of the Indian duo.

www.sportingnews.com

Hahahahahahahaha

 

[nobbyiscool]

I've just been re-watching the last session on Fox Sports.

It's strange to me that we choose to accept some forms of technology and not others.

The whole drama around Jaiswal is cos Snicko doesn't show anything - we're placing this massive importance on an entirely fallible audio technology.

Meanwhile we have Fox Sports reminding us all summer that they have 80 of these super slo-mo cameras around the ground that allow you to see a batter changing their mind, and we don't use the line diagrams that show the deviation.

Those lines aren't a guess, they're not even an estimation - they're a 3D image created by 80 cameras of exactly where the ball went. So we know from their footage and their 3D renderings of it that it 100% deflected of Jaiswal's glove.

 

[ABAB]

So not out?? Or out??

He just said it should have been given by Wilson, had he done that then there wouldn't have been any controversy as Jaiswal knew he hit it and would have just walked. Hell, had he been a competent umpire he would have given the LBW earlier so this wouldn't have happened to him.

 

[greatwhiteshark]

74k

That’s just incredible. I’m overseas so a bit late on everything. But loving we won.

 

[Mister B]

Are you guys marnus Labaschagne with these opinions and appeals? **** me. Starc angled across there was no deflection a joke. You guys are on drugs

Blokes opinions are so shit he appears to have quoted himself telling himself he must be on drugs with his own posting.

 

[to1994]

'Virat Kohli will play for 3-4 years but Rohit Sharma...' - Ravi Shastri's assessment of India batting duo's Test cricket future | Sporting News India

Rohit Sharma and Virat Kohli failed to score big again in the fourth Test of the series with a huge target to be chased on the final day. See what Ravi Shastri thinks about the future of the Indian duo.

www.sportingnews.com

Hahahahahahahaha

Apparently Kohli is signed to Shastri's player management company...

 

[western royboy]

That’s just incredible. I’m overseas so a bit late on everything. But loving we won.

I got to days 3 & 4, epic game that swung wildly at times. Test Cricket at its absolute finest, finishing late in the last session….on the 5th day.

 

[The Tilt]

If Starc is cooked which I think he is especially with match figures of 1-111, we should go Abbott and Richardson for Marsh and Starc. 6 Carey, 7 Abbott, 8 Cummins, 9 Richardson. Still decent batting. 2 strikes bowlers in Richardson and Cummins, 2 stock bowlers in Boland and Abbott. An extra bowler in Abbott if Richardson is a bit underdone. We can't carry an injured Starc especially with Marsh not bowling.

No way are we taking one fewer specialist batsmen in a game we only need to draw.

 

[revo333]

Apparently Kohli is signed to Shastri's player management company...

Imagine in the future when people bang on about Kolhi and people look up his stats to find a test average of 45.

huh?

 

[Run n Spread]

Out

Ok -1

 

[Mr Meow]

Blokes opinions are so shit he appears to have quoted himself telling himself he must be on drugs with his own posting.

I'm still waiting for his superimposing analytical masterclass.

Maybe something for him to work during the mother of all hangovers tomorrow.

 

[beatnik]

Agreed. Don was a bit of an arseh*le, but you know what? A lot of successful people are.

And generally his world views are likely shared by the majority of the dear old grandmothers and grandfathers (rest their souls if applicable) of everyone posting here.

Yes folks, your sweet nanna might have made great roasts on a Sunday but she probably regularly went to Church and was also a bit further to the right of the political spectrum than you.

Just say it - she was xenophobic and racist…

I've just been re-watching the last session on Fox Sports.

It's strange to me that we choose to accept some forms of technology and not others.

The whole drama around Jaiswal is cos Snicko doesn't show anything - we're placing this massive importance on an entirely fallible audio technology.

Meanwhile we have Fox Sports reminding us all summer that they have 80 of these super slo-mo cameras around the ground that allow you to see a batter changing their mind, and we don't use the line diagrams that show the deviation.

Those lines aren't a guess - they're a 3D image created by 80 cameras. So we know from their footage and their 3D renderings of it that it 100% deflected of Jaiswal's glove.

Google false negatives

The tech is not infallible…all it does is show a spike when it detects a sound…if there is a clear spike that could not have been created by anything but the bat then the 3rd umpire can use it it as proof of an edge but the lack of a spike only means it didn’t pick up the contact that the vision CLEARLY shows…he belted it

Think about it this way: if the vision showed a clear gap between bat and ball but snicko showed a spike, you’d want the 3rd umpire to ignore it right? This is the same but in reverse