Australia vs India - Test Series

This sub fielder issue wouldn't even be a debate if we had bowled better and gotten him out earlier.

Aside from Cummins our bowling has been rubbish. We got a lucky dismissal from a rash shot which has put us back ahead but we can't rely on India throwing these remaining wickets away.
 
Last edited:
This sub fielder issue wouldn't even be a debate if we had bowled better and gotten him out earlier.

Aside from Cummins our bowling has been rubbish. We got a lucky dismissal from a rash shot which has put us back ahead but we can't rely on India throwing these remaining wickets away.

I don't even think Cummins has been that good today.
 
Again, thanks for stating the obvious and for answering a question I didn't ask.

Yes you did, you said today is precedent setting and dodgy- It's not because the rule is the same as it's always been- I pointed out the injury still has to happen during the game. You didn't know how sub fielders work and I helped you.

Where is the precedent?

Pretty straight forward.
 
Yes you did, you said today is precedent setting and dodgy- It's not because the rule is the same as it's always been- I pointed out the injury still has to happen during the game. You didn't know how sub fielders work and I helped you.

Where is the precedent?

Pretty straight forward.

I am going to end our discussion here.
 
Australia are throwing this game to show that they sympathise with the treatment of Siraj....
 
Might have to go defensive. They were gonna have to win at the Gabba anyway, don’t see a draw happening there.
 
On going debate today here. Lalor is going nuts- but my point is how is it any different to 1000000 times a sub fielder has been used and then a guy still bats?

Abbott fielded yesterday.
I think there are some significant differences to what has been accepted even though they are within the rules.
Normally a player won't miss an entire innings unless it's a leg injury then disadvantage at bat because of injury and having to use a runner.
If it's a hand injury that stops a player fielding then once again batting is hindered.
if it's a bruised arm then you come out and show no sign of it hindering you holding a bat or playing every shot in the book and having the power to belt 6s down the ground then I would suggest its bullshit and should be called that.
 
I think there are some significant differences to what has been accepted even though they are within the rules.
Normally a player won't miss an entire innings unless it's a leg injury then disadvantage at bat because of injury and having to use a runner.
If it's a hand injury that stops a player fielding then once again batting is hindered.
if it's a bruised arm then you come out and show no sign of it hindering you holding a bat or playing every shot in the book and having the power to belt 6s down the ground then I would suggest its bullshit and should be called that.

That's on the umpires to decide and they allowed a sub just like they just did for Pucovski- if Australia had to bat again I am sure Pucovski would be back out there to bat.

No runners anymore hasn't been for a while.
 

Active Now

  • ChewThePhatt
  • I bleed Maroon
  • BruiserMk1
  • Hurrijo
  • Broncosarethebest
  • Spoon
  • Santa
  • Lozza
  • Johnny92
  • Broncorob
  • NSW stables
  • matthewransom34@ic
  • BroncosAlways
  • The Don
  • Skyblues87
  • Alec
  • TonyTheJugoslav
  • bert_lifts
  • Sproj
  • TwoLeftFeet
... and 5 more.
Top
  AdBlock Message
Please consider adding BHQ to your Adblock Whitelist. We do our best to make sure it doesn't affect your experience on the website, and the funds help us pay server and software costs.