Ashes 2009

[David]

Can we win..?



went to bed at tea, so missed most of the runs towards the end.

200 + change to get over the line ....?

[Bacon]

Its a gettable amount, however we lose one of these batters, and we'll be pushing it uphill.

Should be interesting first session.

[bennymacca]

if they get through the first session tomorrow without losing a wicket, i definitely think they can do it.

that would add 80-100 runs, and give them about 100-120 to chase

gonna be tough (obviously), but how awesome would it be if they pulled a victory out of their arse?

just a shame that it could be umpiring decisions that ruin the test match

edit: snap bacon.

[muzzington]

I don't understand why they didn't refer the Hughes catch. :/

[bennymacca]

its ridiculous, especially because they did refer a catch the day before with bopara, and that one was ruled not out.

[Chelsea4thewin]

3 wickets they didnt refer to the 3rd umpire, load of sh*t really

[David]

Haddin should have been out off his glove as well.

[bennymacca]

3 wickets they didnt refer to the 3rd umpire, load of sh*t really

at present, they can't refer anything except for runouts and dubious catches (change pending in october)

but the hughes one should really have been deferred, it was exactly like bopara's the day before, and that got referred and (quite rightly) given not out because it was inconclusive.

[David]

We are at where we are.

Tough position. Some decisions didn't go our way and some didn't go theirs.
Hussey wasn't out, but I saw it live, including his reaction (ie none) and it looked quite standard.

Only after the replay did people start to doubt it. So, due credit to Hussey for taking it that way, and the umpire was wrong - but I think most people were when it was initially happening.

Come on, lets win!

[Scotty]

3 wickets they didnt refer to the 3rd umpire, load of sh*t really

at present, they can't refer anything except for runouts and dubious catches (change pending in october)

but the hughes one should really have been deferred, it was exactly like bopara's the day before, and that got referred and (quite rightly) given not out because it was inconclusive.

Pretty sure they are supposed to refer catches they are unsure of to the 3rd umpire. Problem was, after Rudy checked with Doctrove, Doctrove was sure it had carried. (How he was sure, from square leg and a keeper impeding his view, though ... ) So once a field umpire is satisfied it carried, they won't refer it.

It is against the current laws, apparently, for the players to ask for it to be referred, which Ponting did - there's also a case for him to be fined/reprimanded for doing so.