Bazza said:Or what if it was Shane Warne bowling around the wicket and the ball is to pitch on middle just in front of the crease?
Clearly you just have to judge each ball on it's merits.
Incidentally, in a recent national league game Michael Clarke was hit on the toe in front of about middle by an inswinging delivery from Glamorgan's Andrew Davies. The commentators said he was plumb, but I wasn't convinced the ball wasn't missing leg stump. Later when Michael Holding came on he said he thought it was missing, and encouraged the viewers to email in, and amongst viewers there was probably about a 50-50 split in opnions, suggesting there was at least enough doubt to give the benefit to the batsman.
Of course this was a long time after the event and I was only bitter at the time because Hants were doing so badly! But hopefully it is an example of when the ball can do as described and not be hitting the stumps.
Bazza said:Of course this was a long time after the event and I was only bitter at the time because Hants were doing so badly!
You dug up a thread from nearly three years ago to say "it could indeed"? Idiot.Richard said:It could indeed.
Yeah, don't ask me why, I just felt like it.Neil Pickup said:This has to be the biggest thread-digging of all time, ever.
laugh:Richard said:I just went to "last page" and dug-up the first thread that wasn't closed.
Forever now the first thread will be "how do you post..." because it's closed and no-one can ever dig it up...
That also makes it twice that I've now dug-up this thread.marc71178 said:I guess it's all part of the umpire's job. In theory an inswinger could hit the man in fromt of middle, but be going on down legside, even if it hits him on the crease.
I think this applies again.Neil Pickup said:This has to be the biggest thread-digging of all time, ever.
And I can tell you you're wrong...Richard said:Did anyone ever manage to find-out which was marc's first-ever CW post?
If not, I can tell you that IT WAS THIS ONE!!!!!