View previous topic :: View next topic |
Hatty
Site Admin
In: Berkshire
|
|
|
|
No interview should be filmed while someone is blubbing. It's uncomfortable for everyone and a sobbing person can hardly be heard anyway so what's the point?
The media is presumably at least partly to blame in their eagerness for human interest or whatever they call it. Managers have to be able to manage the media as well or as badly as the players. Unless you're Sir Alex.
(P.S. Re stiffness, it's de rigueur)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mick Harper
Site Admin
In: London
|
|
|
|
That's what the wife said.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mick Harper
Site Admin
In: London
|
|
|
|
As usual, I'd better be the only person in the galaxy to point out that Mane's 'deliberate handball' at Palace was not deliberate handball at all. He was picking it up because he thought it was a free kick. He did it deliberately, and was penalised for it,. but he was not deliberately handling the ball.
I know this will be a difficult concept for some of you but it is analogous to a similarly unanimous error about goalies sliding out of the area still holding onto the ball. Just because they are still 'deliberately' holding the ball does not mean they are guilty of deliberate handball. Just handball. If they deliberately hang on to it afterwards (say because there is a forward bearing down on them) then it's a yellow card. Not otherwise, not just for inadvertently being outside the area clutching a ball they deliberately hold in their hands.
Gotit? No, I don't suppose so. I'm too good for this galaxy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Wile E. Coyote
In: Arizona
|
|
|
|
was the players hand/arm in an unnatural position.
The guidance of the law is based on this and not what is in the players head |
At least this is the wife's interpretation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mick Harper
Site Admin
In: London
|
|
|
|
He didn't get it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mick Harper
Site Admin
In: London
|
|
|
|
Here's an idea. Why don't we have 'the new ball' for the entirety of a test match? Change it every ten overs (or whatever). Every other sport makes sure the 'implement' is the same for everyone, all the time. We all agree that 'taking the new ball' is the most exciting part of the game. Death of spinners? Not at all, spinners like it too -- what they lose in grip they gain in bounce. Of course scores will go down and matches will be shorter (assuming batsmen don't/can't adjust) but wouldn't that be a good thing too? There's a reason why the red ball game is losing out to the white ball and it's not all down to popcorn tastes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mick Harper
Site Admin
In: London
|
|
|
|
Here's an AE quiz question for you all. Why does the wicket-keeper spill fewer catches than the slips? Remember, it's an AE quiz question.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hatty
Site Admin
In: Berkshire
|
|
|
|
Is it to do with the wicket keeper wearing gloves?
Also, I wondered about the speed of the ball. Does a ball that's just been whacked travel faster than the one bowled?
Please don't tell us it's to do with cameras.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mick Harper
Site Admin
In: London
|
|
|
|
'Gloves' is the saloon bar answer. If the ball has been whacked probably 'yes', but if it has been nicked to the slips presumably 'no'. At least that is my understanding of physics. 'Cameras' is just plain mindboggling.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Wile E. Coyote
In: Arizona
|
|
|
|
Wicket keeping is a specialist function, like batting and bowling. If a keeper drops catches he is (err) dropped.
Fielding is a secondary occupation.
Don't believe me?
Ask yourself the question if sunglasses help fielders to catch, why dont wicket keepers and batsmen wear them? No fielders are there to pose.
The answer is cool shades, posing and attitude to the side job.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mick Harper
Site Admin
In: London
|
|
|
|
More from the saloon bar.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hatty
Site Admin
In: Berkshire
|
|
|
|
No difference in their rate of catching if you watch the whole match as opposed to highlights.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mick Harper
Site Admin
In: London
|
|
|
|
I had better finish off the handball scandal rocking the nation.
was the players hand/arm in an unnatural position. The guidance of the law is based on this and not what is in the players head |
Mane's hand was in a completely natural position (for picking up the ball) and there is no dispute about what was in his head (he thought a foul had been committed). Perhaps this scenario will help: a corner comes over, the centre half rises like a swallow and ... neatly catches the ball in both hands. The ref blows. The centre half then says he heard a whistle in the crowd and thought it was the ref's. This is confirmed by one or two others. Now the ref has a choice: he can award a penalty for handball (if he's feeling harsh) or a dropped ball (if not) but what he can't do is give the centre half a yellow card for 'deliberate handball' even though it was.
In case any of you doubt the wisdom of my argument, ask yourself why the ref on Saturday didn't give Mane a yellow (and then a red card). Because he knew the law, dummies.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mick Harper
Site Admin
In: London
|
|
|
|
No difference in their rate of catching if you watch the whole match as opposed to highlights.
|
Ah yes, most ingenious. Wrong!!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You're not including 'catches' to include when the batsman makes no contact with the ball are you? The ball having already bounced in front of the wicket, that is. If these are counted, then as a proportion the keeper would have a higher success rate because the probability of the ball carrying to him/her would be greater than it carrying to the slips therefore they would be more expectant of receiving it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|