In message <764e263e-5588-41d9-a8f9-1675fa7247bbn@googlegroups.com>,
mike <dmike204@yahoo.co.uk> writes
>On Monday, July 31, 2023 at 8:35:210 >> In message <ua91oa$3bvfp$1...@dont-email.me>, alvey
>> <Paddy.O....@Coast.org> writes
>> >On Wed, 26 Jul 2023 10:07:18 -0700, mike wrote:
>
>i dont think i did
>> >
>> >Will the umps in this Test get MBEs? Or are the bags of cash they received
>> >for that farcial ball change suffucient?
>> >
>> >
>
>tms said it was englands david millns

Not "England's" while serving as third umpire, I hope! Just English.

> who selected the ball, although i thought
>all he did was bring out the case.

Yes, that's all he did. I think the on-field umpires chose a ball from
the box that was brought out. As they aren't English, all that could be
alleged is that they were incompetent rather than biased.

>but certainly the 1 england got after 37 overs
>was very shiny.

To their credit, I don't think any of the Australian players have
complained about the choice of ball. (They seem for the most part like a
thoroughly nice bunch - even the ones who come from NSW, Alvey.) Ponting
has complained, though. Of course he has form as a whinging Aussie from
the Gary Pratt run-out in 2005. :)

<snip>
>
>the other issue the icc might address is not allowing the players to
>touch the wicket except when the ball is in play, like when broad
>rearranged murphys bails, otherwise we might see bowlers doing
>this every over.
>
>mike

I can't see bowlers doing that, though I suspect that the ICC will
introduce a regulation anyway.
--
John Hall "[It was] so steep that at intervals the street broke into steps,
like a person breaking into giggles or hiccups, and then resumed
its sober climb, until it had another fit of steps."
Ursula K Le Guin "The Beginning Place"

In message <ua9bd0$3ct3j$2@dont-email.me>, alvey
<Paddy.O.Furniture@Coast.org> writes
<snip>
>And here's a poser...
>If the umpires are the sole judges of "[a replacement ball] which has
>had wear comparable with that which the previous ball had received
>before the need for its replacement...", can the batters ask for a
>review of their decision on "comparable"?

I don't think there's any provision in the regulations for that.
--
John Hall "[It was] so steep that at intervals the street broke into steps,
like a person breaking into giggles or hiccups, and then resumed
its sober climb, until it had another fit of steps."
Ursula K Le Guin "The Beginning Place"

In message <c3bf009a-a7ec-4b02-b953-f80d96ee33ddn@googlegroups.com>,
jack fredricks <jzfredricks@gmail.com> writes
>The failure here is not having enough used balls. Surely the ICC can
>develop a machine that damages balls in a controlled and consistent way
>so that all (practical) degrees of wear are available.

I'd have thought that would be pretty difficult. As things stand, they
have to rely on Dukes' Test Match standard balls that have had the
required amount of use in a match, and it must be difficult to get balls
with about 20, 30, 40, 50, 60, 70, 80 and 90 overs wear. (I assume a
ball will almost never need to be replaced after about 10 overs and that
sides will almost always have taken a new ball before 100 overs.)

I did wonder if balls used in practice could be used, but they probably
aren't of the same standard (Test Match standard balls must be
expensive), and anyway I don't suppose anyone keeps track of how many
deliveries they have been used for. Also bowlers probably don't take the
same care in shining them. (After all, you are unlikely to get reverse
swing bowling in the nets.)
--
John Hall "[It was] so steep that at intervals the street broke into steps,
like a person breaking into giggles or hiccups, and then resumed
its sober climb, until it had another fit of steps."
Ursula K Le Guin "The Beginning Place"

In message <kirn9mFdcq7U1@mid.individual.net>, David North
<nospam@lane-farm.fsnet.co.uk> writes
>
>I just noticed that England started the Oval Test with 6 players with
>100+ Test wickets. I'm guessing that that was a first.
>

Root let the side down, only having 60 wickets. :) Otherwise there would
have been seven. (Though Brook bowled a few overs in the first innings,
I think it's fair to exclude him from consideration.)

I suspect the total number of Test wickets taken by the England attack
would also be a record.
--
John Hall "[It was] so steep that at intervals the street broke into steps,
like a person breaking into giggles or hiccups, and then resumed
its sober climb, until it had another fit of steps."
Ursula K Le Guin "The Beginning Place"

On Tuesday, August 1, 2023 at 7:19:13 PM UTC+10, John Hall wrote:
> In message <c3bf009a-a7ec-4b02...@googlegroups.com>,
> jack fredricks <jzfre...@gmail.com> writes
> >The failure here is not having enough used balls. Surely the ICC can
> >develop a machine that damages balls in a controlled and consistent way
> >so that all (practical) degrees of wear are available.
> I'd have thought that would be pretty difficult. As things stand, they
> have to rely on Dukes' Test Match standard balls that have had the
> required amount of use in a match, and it must be difficult to get balls
> with about 20, 30, 40, 50, 60, 70, 80 and 90 overs wear. (I assume a
> ball will almost never need to be replaced after about 10 overs and that
> sides will almost always have taken a new ball before 100 overs.)

A machine could wear them, negating the "in a match" part of your comment.

Heck, chuck em in a padded washing machine and spin it for 5mins. Close enough to 20 overs wear? Great.
Now work out how much time is needed for 30 etc.

Then actually put some ICC resources into it. A paint can shaker might be a good start.

These issues really are trivial.

On Tuesday, August 1, 2023 at 7:29:14 PM UTC+10, John Hall wrote:
> In message <kirn9m...@mid.individual.net>, David North
> <nos...@lane-farm.fsnet.co.uk> writes
> >
> >I just noticed that England started the Oval Test with 6 players with
> >100+ Test wickets. I'm guessing that that was a first.
> >
> Root let the side down, only having 60 wickets. :) Otherwise there would
> have been seven. (Though Brook bowled a few overs in the first innings,
> I think it's fair to exclude him from consideration.)
>
> I suspect the total number of Test wickets taken by the England attack
> would also be a record.
> --
> John Hall "[It was] so steep that at intervals the street broke into steps,
> like a person breaking into giggles or hiccups, and then resumed
> its sober climb, until it had another fit of steps."
> Ursula K Le Guin "The Beginning Place"

its so sad we still remain the holder of the Ashes

and that is the only thing that counts

On Tuesday, August 1, 2023 at 7:09:13 PM UTC+10, John Hall wrote:
> To their credit, I don't think any of the Australian players have
> complained about the choice of ball.

Yeah... nah.
Lots of complaints by Aussie players have been reported here in Aus.

https://www.news.com.au/sport/cricket/nothing-else-in-the-box-khawaja-questioned-umpires-brand-new-ball-change-in-ashes-finale/news-story/7fd330da681f40261d6804ba6e57b03b

Usman certainly complained *to the umpires*.

On Tuesday, August 1, 2023 at 10:43:03 AM UTC+1, jack fredricks wrote:
> On Tuesday, August 1, 2023 at 7:09:13 PM UTC+10, John Hall wrote:
> > To their credit, I don't think any of the Australian players have
> > complained about the choice of ball.
> Yeah... nah.
> Lots of complaints by Aussie players have been reported here in Aus.
>
> https://www.news.com.au/sport/cricket/nothing-else-in-the-box-khawaja-questioned-umpires-brand-new-ball-change-in-ashes-finale/news-story/7fd330da681f40261d6804ba6e57b03b
>
> Usman certainly complained *to the umpires*.

This is nonsense. An umpire taking account of how a ball wears is no different from an umpire taking account of the weather and its effect on the pitch or outfield or the condition of the light and the quality and nature of the bowling. In short a great deal is in the hands of the umpires. RH

On Tuesday, 1 August 2023 at 10:42:44 UTC+1, wlsut...@gmail.com wrote:

> its so sad we still remain the holder of the Ashes
>
> and that is the only thing that counts

Still laughing at you rattled by the Brook "we won the moral ashes" press conference

On Wednesday, 26 July 2023 at 18:07:19 UTC+1, mike wrote:
> England name unchanged side including the GOAT quick bowler whos
> taken 4 wkts at about 70 with a strike rate of 171 over 3 tests whereas
> i hoped we might get more Tongue. And I think the oval is jimmys least effective ground in the UK, but the weather looks similar to OT. Hopefully there be some play on thursday, friday looks ok, saturday may be disrupted Sunday more promising, monday a complete washout. England have been bigging themselves up in the usual way, but will they walk the walk not
> just talk the talk this time?

For those that believe I attend cricket matches, was there on days 2,3,4 and 5. Probably as this country is a less attractive place to come these days I was struck by the relative lack of Aussies in the crowd compared to, say, 2005. The usual Club 58-70 identikit-dressed tour group was there but I felt there was loads fewer aussies in general there. Maybe it's the ridiculous ticket prices nowadays.

Anyhow, enjoyed the Disney ending - and Woakes getting some limelight.

Richard

In message <f8c2526f-8071-4d78-9cf2-225fd0bf2a91n@googlegroups.com>,
Richard Dixon <richsdixon1975@gmail.com> writes
>For those that believe I attend cricket matches, was there on days
>2,3,4 and 5. Probably as this country is a less attractive place to
>come these days I was struck by the relative lack of Aussies in the
>crowd compared to, say, 2005. The usual Club 58-70 identikit-dressed
>tour group was there but I felt there was loads fewer aussies in
>general there.

Sky gave the opposite impression by how often they put their cameras on
groups of Aussies in the crowd.

> Maybe it's the ridiculous ticket prices nowadays.

Or maybe Australians haven't yet got back to travelling abroad in large
numbers after Covid? There are probably fewr Aussies resient in this
county post-Covid too.

>
>Anyhow, enjoyed the Disney ending - and Woakes getting some limelight.

Yep. Perfect for Broad, Moeen and Woakes. Sadly imperfect for Anderson.
--
John Hall "[It was] so steep that at intervals the street broke into steps,
like a person breaking into giggles or hiccups, and then resumed
its sober climb, until it had another fit of steps."
Ursula K Le Guin "The Beginning Place"

On Tuesday, August 1, 2023 at 6:19:24 PM UTC+1, John Hall wrote:
> In message <f8c2526f-8071-4d78...@googlegroups.com>,
> Richard Dixon <richsdi...@gmail.com> writes
> >For those that believe I attend cricket matches, was there on days
> >2,3,4 and 5. Probably as this country is a less attractive place to
> >come these days I was struck by the relative lack of Aussies in the
> >crowd compared to, say, 2005. The usual Club 58-70 identikit-dressed
> >tour group was there but I felt there was loads fewer aussies in
> >general there.
> Sky gave the opposite impression by how often they put their cameras on
> groups of Aussies in the crowd.
> > Maybe it's the ridiculous ticket prices nowadays.

how much was it at the oval? i read that if you disguised yourself as a
child you could sneak in for £25

> Or maybe Australians haven't yet got back to travelling abroad in large
> numbers after Covid? There are probably fewr Aussies resient in this
> county post-Covid too.
> >
> >Anyhow, enjoyed the Disney ending - and Woakes getting some limelight.
> Yep. Perfect for Broad, Moeen and Woakes. Sadly imperfect for Anderson.
> --

hope he doesnt follow tendulkars example playing on hoping for 1 last great
perf but never achieving it.

some final stats from the saltyman before this ashes is laid to rest. Apparently
this was the highest scoring match since before WW2 [i forgot the year] without
a century, and becos jonnys runout at lords was called a stumping, there wasnt
a runout in the entire series.

mike

On Wednesday, August 2, 2023 at 7:58:25 AM UTC+10, mike wrote:
> On Tuesday, August 1, 2023 at 6:19:24 PM UTC+1, John Hall wrote:
> > In message <f8c2526f-8071-4d78...@googlegroups.com>,
> > Richard Dixon <richsdi...@gmail.com> writes
> > >For those that believe I attend cricket matches, was there on days
> > >2,3,4 and 5. Probably as this country is a less attractive place to
> > >come these days I was struck by the relative lack of Aussies in the
> > >crowd compared to, say, 2005. The usual Club 58-70 identikit-dressed
> > >tour group was there but I felt there was loads fewer aussies in
> > >general there.
> > Sky gave the opposite impression by how often they put their cameras on
> > groups of Aussies in the crowd.
> > > Maybe it's the ridiculous ticket prices nowadays.
> how much was it at the oval? i read that if you disguised yourself as a
> child you could sneak in for £25
> > Or maybe Australians haven't yet got back to travelling abroad in large
> > numbers after Covid? There are probably fewr Aussies resient in this
> > county post-Covid too.
> > >
> > >Anyhow, enjoyed the Disney ending - and Woakes getting some limelight.
> > Yep. Perfect for Broad, Moeen and Woakes. Sadly imperfect for Anderson.
> > --
> hope he doesnt follow tendulkars example playing on hoping for 1 last great
> perf but never achieving it.
>
> some final stats from the saltyman before this ashes is laid to rest. Apparently
> this was the highest scoring match since before WW2 [i forgot the year] without
> a century, and becos jonnys runout at lords was called a stumping, there wasnt
> a runout in the entire series.
>
> mike

final post on the Ashes, the 2nd Best Team retains them

On 01/08/2023 10:12, John Hall wrote:
> In message <c3bf009a-a7ec-4b02-b953-f80d96ee33ddn@googlegroups.com>,
> jack fredricks <jzfredricks@gmail.com> writes
>> The failure here is not having enough used balls. Surely the ICC can
>> develop a machine that damages balls in a controlled and consistent
>> way so that all (practical) degrees of wear are available.
>
> I'd have thought that would be pretty difficult. As things stand, they
> have to rely on Dukes' Test Match standard balls that have had the
> required amount of use in a match, and it must be difficult to get balls
> with about 20, 30, 40, 50, 60, 70, 80 and 90 overs wear. (I assume a
> ball will almost never need to be replaced after about 10 overs and that
> sides will almost always have taken a new ball before 100 overs.)

I can't recall any instances of an old ball being replaced by another
old ball after a new one had become available.

--
David North

On 01/08/2023 10:04, John Hall wrote:
> In message <ua9bd0$3ct3j$2@dont-email.me>, alvey
> <Paddy.O.Furniture@Coast.org> writes
> <snip>
>> And here's a poser...
>> If the umpires are the sole judges of "[a replacement ball] which has
>> had wear comparable with that which the previous ball had received
>> before the need for its replacement...", can the batters ask for a
>> review of their decision on "comparable"?
>
> I don't think there's any provision in the regulations for that.

There's none that I can see.

"4.5 Ball lost or becoming unfit for play

"If, during play, the ball cannot be found or recovered or the umpires
agree that it has become unfit for play through normal use, the umpires
shall replace it with a ball which has had wear comparable with that
which the previous ball had received before the need for its
replacement. When the ball is replaced, the umpires shall inform the
batters and the fielding captain.

"However, if the ball needs to be replaced after 110 overs for any of
the reasons above, it shall be replaced by a new ball. If the ball is to
be replaced, the umpires shall inform the batters, the fielding captain
and the scorers."

They can ask, but the umpires don't have to take any notice.

--
David North

On 03/08/2023 07:41, David North wrote:
> On 01/08/2023 10:04, John Hall wrote:
>> In message <ua9bd0$3ct3j$2@dont-email.me>, alvey
>> <Paddy.O.Furniture@Coast.org> writes
>> <snip>
>>> And here's a poser...
>>> If the umpires are the sole judges of "[a replacement ball] which has
>>> had wear comparable with that which the previous ball had received
>>> before the need for its replacement...", can the batters ask for a
>>> review of their decision on "comparable"?
>>
>> I don't think there's any provision in the regulations for that.
>
> There's none that I can see.
>
> "4.5 Ball lost or becoming unfit for play
>
> "If, during play, the ball cannot be found or recovered or the umpires
> agree that it has become unfit for play through normal use, the umpires
> shall replace it with a ball which has had wear comparable with that
> which the previous ball had received before the need for its
> replacement. When the ball is replaced, the umpires shall inform the
> batters and the fielding captain.
>
> "However, if the ball needs to be replaced after 110 overs for any of
> the reasons above, it shall be replaced by a new ball. If the ball is to
> be replaced, the umpires shall inform the batters, the fielding captain
> and the scorers."
>
> They can ask, but the umpires don't have to take any notice.

I forgot the link:

https://resources.pulse.icc-cricket.com/ICC/document/2023/06/13/3b3ae6f2-4f7a-4237-a14a-7707b2665fd7/WTC3-Playing-Conditions-2023.pdf

--
David North

On 01/08/2023 10:42, wlsut...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Tuesday, August 1, 2023 at 7:29:14 PM UTC+10, John Hall wrote:
>> In message <kirn9m...@mid.individual.net>, David North
>> <nos...@lane-farm.fsnet.co.uk> writes
>>>
>>> I just noticed that England started the Oval Test with 6 players with
>>> 100+ Test wickets. I'm guessing that that was a first.
>>>
>> Root let the side down, only having 60 wickets. :) Otherwise there would
>> have been seven. (Though Brook bowled a few overs in the first innings,
>> I think it's fair to exclude him from consideration.)
>>
>> I suspect the total number of Test wickets taken by the England attack
>> would also be a record.
>> --
>> John Hall "[It was] so steep that at intervals the street broke into steps,
>> like a person breaking into giggles or hiccups, and then resumed
>> its sober climb, until it had another fit of steps."
>> Ursula K Le Guin "The Beginning Place"
>
>
> its so sad we still remain the holder of the Ashes
>
> and that is the only thing that counts

Not that you're going to bang on about it of course.

I mentioned it only as an interesting statistic in itself (and would
have done so if it had been Australia). I wasn't trying to prove anything.

--
David North

On 02/08/2023 13:14, wlsut...@gmail.com wrote:
> final post on the Ashes, the 2nd Best Team retains them

There are at least two ambiguities in that statement:

Retains: literally or metaphorically?
2nd Best: of the two or in the world?

--
David North

On Tuesday, 1 August 2023 at 22:58:25 UTC+1, mike wrote:

> how much was it at the oval? i read that if you disguised yourself as a
> child you could sneak in for £25

£110 for Days 2-4, £20 for Day 5. I do have good seats at about 5 degrees to straight on behind the bowlers arm though in the Pavilion.

> Perfect for Broad, Moeen and Woakes. Sadly imperfect for Anderson.
> hope he doesnt follow tendulkars example playing on hoping for 1 last great
> perf but never achieving it.

He missed the great opportunity to do what Warne and McGrath did and retire with his bowling buddy. He's clearly still fit enough and quick enough but as Sky pointed out he's slightly less full in length (or was it fuller - genuinely can't remember) compared to recent years. I'm sure he's got one more summer left in him against WI and SL - but most of next year will be a Test of Stokes' bloody-minded loyalty to players to see whether Anderson stays on.

On Saturday, August 5, 2023 at 7:21:09 PM UTC+10, Richard Dixon wrote:
> On Tuesday, 1 August 2023 at 22:58:25 UTC+1, mike wrote:
>
> > how much was it at the oval? i read that if you disguised yourself as a
> > child you could sneak in for £25
> £110 for Days 2-4, £20 for Day 5. I do have good seats at about 5 degrees to straight on behind the bowlers arm though in the Pavilion.
> > Perfect for Broad, Moeen and Woakes. Sadly imperfect for Anderson.
> > hope he doesnt follow tendulkars example playing on hoping for 1 last great
> > perf but never achieving it.
> He missed the great opportunity to do what Warne and McGrath did and retire with his bowling buddy. He's clearly still fit enough and quick enough but as Sky pointed out he's slightly less full in length (or was it fuller - genuinely can't remember) compared to recent years.

But is that forced by the pitch?
Or could it be that he's just a bit off after the niggles he had an will figure it out?

> I'm sure he's got one more summer left in him against WI and SL - but most of next year will be a Test of Stokes' bloody-minded loyalty to players to see whether Anderson stays on.

In message <dcff5363-14d0-47b6-afe3-ff9b3811b4ecn@googlegroups.com>,
Richard Dixon <richsdixon1975@gmail.com> writes
>On Tuesday, 1 August 2023 at 22:58:25 UTC+1, mike wrote:
>
>> how much was it at the oval? i read that if you disguised yourself as a
>> child you could sneak in for £25
>
>£110 for Days 2-4, £20 for Day 5. I do have good seats at about 5
>degrees to straight on behind the bowlers arm though in the Pavilion.
>
>> Perfect for Broad, Moeen and Woakes. Sadly imperfect for Anderson.
>> hope he doesnt follow tendulkars example playing on hoping for 1 last great
>> perf but never achieving it.
>
>He missed the great opportunity to do what Warne and McGrath did and
>retire with his bowling buddy. He's clearly still fit enough and quick
>enough but as Sky pointed out he's slightly less full in length (or was
>it fuller - genuinely can't remember) compared to recent years. I'm
>sure he's got one more summer left in him against WI and SL - but most
>of next year will be a Test of Stokes' bloody-minded loyalty to players
>to see whether Anderson stays on.

I suppose Stokes could argue that his bloody-minded loyalty worked out
pretty well in the cases of Crawley and Bairstow (though being loyal to
Bairstow did mkean that he couldn't be loyal to Foakes).
--
John Hall "[It was] so steep that at intervals the street broke into steps,
like a person breaking into giggles or hiccups, and then resumed
its sober climb, until it had another fit of steps."
Ursula K Le Guin "The Beginning Place"

In message <f02f3f5d-bec9-42ba-aa4b-d6c6364c065bn@googlegroups.com>,
Hamish Laws <hamish.laws@gmail.com> writes
>On Saturday, August 5, 2023 at 7:21:090 >> On Tuesday, 1 August 2023 at 22:58:25 UTC+1, mike wrote:
>>
>> > how much was it at the oval? i read that if you disguised yourself as a
>> > child you could sneak in for £25
>> £110 for Days 2-4, £20 for Day 5. I do have good seats at about 5
>>degrees to straight on behind the bowlers arm though in the Pavilion.
>> > Perfect for Broad, Moeen and Woakes. Sadly imperfect for Anderson.
>> > hope he doesnt follow tendulkars example playing on hoping for 1
>> >last great
>> > perf but never achieving it.
>> He missed the great opportunity to do what Warne and McGrath did and
>>retire with his bowling buddy. He's clearly still fit enough and quick
>>enough but as Sky pointed out he's slightly less full in length (or
>>was it fuller - genuinely can't remember) compared to recent years.
>
>But is that forced by the pitch?
>Or could it be that he's just a bit off after the niggles he had an
>will figure it out?

If it was the pitches then it's hard to explain why Woakes - a similar
type of bowler - was so much more effective.
--
John Hall "[It was] so steep that at intervals the street broke into steps,
like a person breaking into giggles or hiccups, and then resumed
its sober climb, until it had another fit of steps."
Ursula K Le Guin "The Beginning Place"