Also, runners are no longer allowed. I've been in favour of that for ages.

Wow that rule does exist :

That's so dumb, and ridiculously subjective. How will the umpire make sure the batsman was blocking a throw and not just trying to run away from the pitch or prevent collision with a fielder or any of the other dozens of variables?. I'm guessing umpires will be instructed to not use this rule unless they think it's blatant but still why introduce another ridiculous variable into the equation?. What was the need for it anyway?.

Imagine a star batsman in a big semi or a final being given out on 99 trying to go for his 100 because of this ****. It seems so stupid like the ******ed substitute rule.

They have a law against backing up too far now and the bowler can run the non striker out which is good.

Don't like the first 2 rules. 2 balls will help the batsmen even more. There are few conditions in the world where the ball swings regularly. The hard new ball comes onto the bat better and that will cause even higher scoring games in the subcontinent especially. Stump rule is whatever, it doesn't effect the game enough to matter either way.

Batsmen running and fielders hitting them with throws happens a decent amount in ODIs (atleast once an innings). Now all of those instances will be appeals, and a few of them might be given out. With this rule fielders maybe encouraged to throw even more and try to hit the guy (it's a freeroll kinda). All he has to do is throw the ball somewhere close to the stumps.

It just seemed to me like it was a part of the game you know, being aware of your surroundings etc. to be able to block a thro,. and I haven't seen any commentator ever saying that a rule like this was needed..

Plus how would you enforce the UDRS on this one?. A computer in gonna map the trajectory of the batsman study all the variables and put it into an equation?.

I think the batsmen obstructing the throw will be very rarely implemented its just common sense. As far as I understand it its only if the batter deliberately and clearly changes his running line to stop the throw.

Commentators were right. The last ODI has Cooke, Bell and Strauss batting in the top 4 striking at 78,78 and 73. You can afford to have one guy who scores slowly at the top, maybe 2 if you have a really strong middle order (england odi have a weak mo imo.). Any SR below 80 in ODI is rubbish unless they can average like 60. This is exactly why Kallis cops so much criticism and will never be spoken in the same breath as Lara, Tandaulker, Ponting etc.

People are completely underestimating how hard it is to win over there. England might win but I'd be calling it a fluke if they did

lol, more jones

Keep in mind also that it was only a 1-0 win and in the first test at Lord's you were nine down in the second innings before tea on day 5, and were only saved by some poor umpiring before the weather closed in to complete the rescue act for you. Plenty of cracks were already being papered over, with India's only century of the series coming from the unlikely blade of Anil Kumble in a high-scoring bore draw on a typical flat pitch at the Oval. Although you probably had better bowlers that series.

Right now we would crush India in India if we played a Test series, but as a team England have never really grasped the fundamental tempo of ODIs, which is why we continually do so badly in them.


fwiw, this is really more of a re-emphasis of an existing law than the introduction of a new one, triggered by an increase in the number of batsmen prepared to abuse the benefit of the doubt by deliberately placing their body to intercept the ball being thrown in a runout attempt. It will be interesting to see if this is more rigorously enforced from now on, and I personally suspect it won't be, but being given out "Obstructing the field" has been a theoretical possibility in such circumstances for quite a long time, with the wording of Law 37 simply saying

This can be taken by the umpires to include such as shouting to distract a fielder attempting a catch or physically impeding a fielder attempting a catch, in which cases the striker is out even if the non-striker is the one committing the offence, and these circumstances represent most dismissals under this law.

Earlier this summer Mark Ramprakash was given out O.T.F. for distracting the keeper, who was attempting to collect the ball from a return throw and complete a runout. Ramprakash never actually touched the ball but was nevertheless given out.

The old favourite from the umpires' exam also included the hypothetical example of a batsman who, believing he will be short of his ground attempting to run, throws his bat in a way to strike all three stumps from the ground at the end towards which he is running, thus preventing any run out attempt from being completed. The fielding side appeal, and your decision should be that the batsman is out Obstructing the field.

I doubt that any umpire is going to trigger a guy for running in the path of the ball. I didnt even think it was a 'benifit of the doubt' issue, just always assumed it was within the batsmans rights to get in the way of the thrower (within reason obv.). Kind of like how its the batsmans right to knock the ball away if it likes like its going to get played on.

Hitting the ball a second time to guard your wicket is expressly permitted under the Laws, except that you may not do so with a hand not holding the bat, which would be out Handled the ball.

But running across the line of the throw during a runout attempt was something which became conventional.

However, like you, I also suspect that batsmen will continue to do it and continue to get away with it. Unless it becomes an issue which gets referred to the third umpire.

Cymbals for gloves IMO.

Simon Katich has come out and said a large part of his axing has to do with him putting Michael Clarke in a choke hold after a test win a few seasons ago. The new look australian cricket team structure gives Clarke a pretty huge say in selection. Although I hate watching Katto bat you have to respect his record and the fact that he gives a pretty weak top order much needed grit. That plus his evident disdain for Clarke pretty much makes him my cricketing idol . Anyway he made his first ton of the season yesterday and if Phil Hughes keeps on failing (which is a certainty imo) the ACB will be looking pretty stupid. You can be assured that Katich is going to have a huge season in domestic cricket given his character, the way he was axed and the very weak state of the shield comp.

Quite an impressive AUS win this morning...as if we needed more proof as to the class of both Watson and Hussey.

Such a shame Pakistan's had their troubles.

Their squad (potentially) is seriously talented.

Hussey is such a good player. He's going to leave a huge gap when he retires.

It seems they have an infinite supply of quality bowlers. Quite amazing actually. As a SL fan I'd settle for 1

yeah i think it was steve waugh who used to say something like 'south africa is the second best team in the world, but we fear pakistan the most'

yea, the raw talent that seems to come out of Pakistan is amazing. Them not being able to play a full schedule really hurts international cricket as they bring something unique to the forefront.

Aussie ODI batting lineup looks really good atm, top 2 in the world definately. Some of the new Aussie players that have come to the fore in the last couple of years are not that impressive but Shawn Marsh is class, probably gonna be the mainstay of thier batting for years to come once Hussey, Ponting are done as well.

We have two problems atm. First, Ponting, Hussey, Haddin and even Watson are all going to be retiring in the near future and with no really obvious replacements its going to leave quite a hole. Second, other than Watson and perhaps Hussey (although his best is past) we have no really top end talent in either batting or bowling departments.

What we do have is loads of good-average players in domestic cricket. I'm not totally sold on Marsh in test cricket yet it will be interesting to see how he goes against the South Africans who do have two world class quicks. He can play ODI though but I want to see him opening or at 3 rather than 5. Definitely should be batting in front of Clarke who isnt a great one day player. I think for the forseeable future we will be fielding competive sides in all forms but still won't be much of a chance against the top sides, most notably England (in tests anyway).

mohammad asif was such a sicko. could move the ball in the air and off the pitch on the flattest of wickets. could of had a career like glenn mcgrath- he was that good imo.

uthappa playing today for india surely. guy hits one of the longest balls in cricket. indian cricketers lives seem to age twice as slow as anybody else(with the exception of abdul razzaq who somehow is 31). uthappa and raina seem to have been around for eveer and yet are 25 and 24. praveen kumar looks like he's been bowling for eternity and yet is 25. Ravindra Jadeja seems to have been getting criticized for years by indian fans and is 22.

Strauss? Im guessing you mean Trott. 2 of those people you mentioned have strike rates of 80 almost exactly, well Lara is slightly under. You can't throw out people averaging 50 because your middle order isn't strong enough to speed up, this just doesn't follow any sort of logic. If you can find a guy who truly averages 50 in ODI's (its obvously questionable that Trott does but have to give him the benefit of the doubt atm) then you build the team around him, you don't chuck him out because the middle order aren't doing their job.

The problem in India is England have played an inexperienced middle order and basically put their hands together and prayed that it worked. Bairstow was a huge gamble that didn't pay off, Bopara is a complete waste of space and Samit did well, but thats 1/3. When England were doing well in ODIs they were setting a base and then Morgan was coming in and finishing the innings off and that is what they should be aiming to do even if it isn't working because they don't have a Sehwag or a Watson waiting in the wings. England should have brought Bell in for Bopara after 1 ODI and given Buttler a go instead of Bairstow after a couple of failures (to give Bairstow the whole series of doing **** all was rediculous).

The point about Kallis is hilarious. In time he will go down as one of the best test batsmen of our generation and easily one of the top 3 all rounders that have ever played the game (and not just in test cricket). This is a guy who averages more with the bat than most batsmen and less with the ball than most bowlers and has caught more catches than all but 5 people. Despite being the same age as Ponting (who is definately on the decline) Kallis still seems to be getting better. He is the king of doing his job, he is the Anchor around which, at the moment, AB, Amla, Duminy and Smith play. He is a powerhouse of world cricket and to say his doesn't match up with Lara, Ponting or Sachin is absolutely absurd, and tbh I think those players would say the same.

tl;dr obv

It actually sickens me that Aamir was dragged into the scandal, he was almost in a class of his own in terms of young promising seamers at that point, there was no one in his league, such a let down.

The point about Kallis is purely related to his batting which is massively massively overrated, his bowling is obviously excellent for a guy who you would call a batting all rounder. I think the stats make him a much better player than he is and from a batting perspective the reason why he isnt in the same class as Lara, Tendaulker and a lesser extent Ponting is that he lacked the capacity to put in match winning innings to the sames frequency that those players could. Tbh I think there have been several other bats who are more worthy than him recent times as well. As an allrounder he is obviously at the top in recent years however if you told me to pick between a fit Flintoff or a fit Kallis I would take Flintoff every day of the week. In terms of the stats being misleading I think its very similar to Steve Waugh who the stats remember as a much better player then he actually was.


cliffnotes: Kallis is the most boring, overrated player in the history of all forms of cricket.

Umar Akmal has also been mentioned which would be a tragedy give n his talent

TBH I don't buy that. Kallis has crushed in the same era, conditions, and attacks as Tendulkar, Ponting etc. I definitely think he's right up there with Ponting, with both slightly behind Tendulkar (I'm only considering tests). Kallis has helped SA win many matches and series. SA were ranked 1-3 pretty much always the last few years, and always been a very competitive side.

Yeah I'm judging a lot on what I've seen of him playing against Australia and just have never been that impressed. I dont think its that bad a way to rate him based on his performances v. Australia given they were for the most part the best bowling attack for much of his career. He averages 40 with highest score of 114, whereas Lara averages 50 and Tendulkar 60 and both have made big double tons.

After looking at cric info however, I am prepared to concede that Kallis is the clear GOAT at beating up on weak bowling attacks.