I agree with you, Scott, on the issue of dubious decisions. It's the main reason that I don't bother counting how many each side gets - because basically it doesn't matter. You've just got to get on with your walk back to the pavilion and let the next man in try to salvage something from the wreckage. And you're right: teams with genuine grit will salvage something; teams which are forever looking back at "what might have been if ..." will lose.

I don't suggest here that the England team are doing that - but fans and pundits do, and it's just a waste of time as far as I can see (though still good fuel for as long as it takes to drink a glass or two at the lunch break, of course).

__________________
Money won't buy you friends. But it gets you a better class of enemy.
Spike Milligan

"Seem". Have had more bad decisions and we can count them if needed. The Saffers have been given a helping hand for the first few wickets at each ground. England got Amla at Headingley. I do believe that's it.

I have to agree when you say it's how you deal with them that really tells the story but in truth you shouldn't have to deal with as many as England have.

Anyone explain why Edgbaston's half full? Give these decent matches to Trent Bridge (if the brummies don't want them!), even sells out for the Kiwis!

Not true- the replay showed that he was hit with a little under half of the ball in line- which i understand is enough to give an LBW decision.

No i don't seeing as he has 68.

'Fraid so. Outside the line.

Might be because it is a Wednesday?

Interestinlgy, he hasn't bowled yet in 39 overs, so there may be something in that "fatigued" business.

'Fraid not. In.

It reminds me of something I saw in Poirot (The Murder of Roger Ackroyd) with the eventual murderer saying that if there's one thing that the murderer can rely on, it's that two people will see the same event happening differently. It seems that this occurs in more mundane situations as well- but when I saw that live, and on the replay, I was positive that it was in.

I think the key words there are 'a little under'. If it's under half the ball, how can it be given out? You need more than half the ball to pitch inline and even then few umpires will give that. It needs to pitch fully inline for most umpires to give at out.

It isn't. You need more than half the ball to pitch inline. Umpires only get one view of LBW's and it's too hard to tell in real time exactly how much of the ball is hitting inline or not, which is why most want to see the whole ball inline before they'll give it out.

Remember, Umpires have to have NO doubts in their mind to give batsmen out.

I wondered if there would be someone round who would tempt fate !

And there was.

__________________
Red-it, Red-it, Read it and wept

And now we're down to the tail!!