Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.


It was Bowden. Loves a leg before, that man. And I think it was Mikey who called it afterwards as a lower-order dismissal - ie a top-order batsman would never cop that stinker.

Brett Pee

A genius like his comes along only once in a lifetime and it's an honour when you actually get to see someone with a special talent in action. Brian Lara ? George Best ? Don't be silly- step forward Billy Bowden.

Is it me or is Dwayne Bravo nothing more than an honest dobber ? And where is Nathan Bracken ?

Pedro the Ignorant

If Biily the Bumpkin paid a bit more attention to the game instead of prancing around like a bow legged bent fingered demented monkey, he might start to get a few more decisions close to being right.

Some other Bruce

I put down Dilly Clownden for 3 howlers in the match.

Lara is lucky it was Dar at the end Symonds was bowling from. Dilly would have gone up with the appeal.

Just 'cause it looks bad doesn't make it out.


Willy Doh!Man is to put it bluntly a spaz. I personaly do not want to see someone having an eppy when signaling a four or six.... the bent finger, whats all that about???????
Back to Hawk Eye, it just needs...ahem...finley tuning with a sledge hammer, in theory it is a great idea, in practice it is a piece of tosh

Brett Pee

Anyone heard Langers post match comments ?

The little Nuggett stated " I feel extremely privileged to have played my cricket in an era of geniuses like Brian, Sachin & Ricky Ponting "

Odd one out anybody ?

Russell Allen

Is this Hawkeye a distant cousin to the Hawkeye used in Wimbledon to call long serves? If so, they both have the same recessive poor eyesight gene.


Brett, who is the odd one out???

Its a bit like Warne or Mgrath saying that they are privileged to have bowled in an era litterd with geniuses such as Giles,Murali,Shoiab and ofourse Lee


I know its Punter really... just teasing

Brett Pee

No- it's Hawkeye & Pierce from the dreaded M*A*S*H.


R. Ponting: 96 tests 158 inns 25 100's 29 50's Average: 56.46
S. Tendulkar: 123 tests 198 inns 34 100's 41 50's Average 57.21
B. Lara: 120 tests 212 inns 30 100's 46 50's Average: 53.20

Since the best two indicators of a batsman's performance are the Average and the ratio of 100's to 50's, it would seem that the odd man out is Brian Lara. His average is only slightly worse than Ponting and Tendulkar's, but his conversion rate is significantly worse than the other two.

The fact that Ponting has scored less runs than either is irrelevant. It's because he has played less innings.

Ricky Ponting is the best batsman in the world at the moment and has been since Tendulkar's form slumped considerably about 5 years ago. The fact that Brian Lara makes a lot of massive scores is pretty meaningless if he makes a lot of shit scores in between. It's also an indication of how scared people are to declare on him.

When it comes down to it, Lara is brilliant - but also reckless, selfish, and more concerned with flair than results. If you had to choose someone to bat for your life you'd choose Ponting ahead of him every time.

Just because he's Australian doesn't mean you HAVE to cut him down like a tall poppy. Sometimes its ok to acknowledge when someone is really, really good.


And Ponting is also by far the best fielder of the three, and can also bowl a bit.

Brett Pee

Nice work on Cricinfo Yobbo !!

Actually sachin is the best bowler of the three- by some distance. Look at his one day stats especially. Punts bowls very occasionially but is still too good for Michael Vaughn.

Then again, i'm probably too good for Michael vaughn.


My sons pet Hamster is to good for Vaughn
I knew I would get a reaction, but jeez there is no coming back at you is there Stato!!!!!!
One of the discussions during Englands second test when Vaughn came in for his second innings, was of how we could do with Ponting at the crease to dig in and see us through. There see, I have aknowledged the jug-eared one (still a shite captain though)


Well Sachin hasn't really bowled for a long time. When he first started he bowled a lot like Steve Waugh and took a lot of one day wickets. After a while he started bowling leggies and now doesn't bowl at all.

Clem Snide

Do you keep records of the sparkies who flunked the "Appearance, representation" part of your syllabus, Tony? I'm just wondering if there is any overlap with the designers of Horkeye. I thought Horkeye really outdid itself today with the Brad Hodge lbw. The extreme late swing was probably taking it down leg side, but Horkeye showed it cleanly hitting middle stump. I'd be much amused to see Horkeye's analysis of the bowling actions of certain subcontinentals, or the caning techniques of certain cricket writers.


Here here


Monday, 12.43pm. Bowden Strikes again. Ramnaresh Sarwan chopped by Silly Billy in the most appalling decision since...his last one.


This time it's Dar. So blatant was the inside edge, even Cricinfo noticed it.

46.6 Warne to DR Smith, OUT: One more in this over! flipper on the off stump, Dwayne moves forward to defend, gets a big inside edge onto
his pads, Aleem Dar gives it out, 5-fer for Warne

DR Smith lbw b Warne 0 (2b 0x4 0x6)

Bring on the robots.


Clem, if I was posting yesterday I would have mentioned Hodge. You are spot on.

It would appear Pawk doesn't update quick enough to plot a trajectory that involves sharp late movement. All the dodgy episodes seem to show a progression of the ball's general flight. In other words, Hawk plots the ball going straight-on from well before it reaches the batsman, thus missing late swing and spin.

Anyhoo, no matter how they do Hawk, it's a farce. I can't for a minute believe that the commentators who are charged with the responsibility of selling us this lemon aren't sitting in the box and groaning "Fuck, not again! There goes some more credibility."

Pedro the Ignorant

I reckon the operators on the Pawk Pie are sitting in the box groaning"Fuck, not again, this stubbies empty, pass me another one!"

Only way to explain how the thing is so blatantly wrong.

They are all pissed.


Hawkeye is dumb, but what's even dumber is not allowing the replay umpire to see the strike zone on the pitch, which actually *is* useful.

Some other Bruce

And now the Clownden's latest antics in making a big song and dance over telling Shiv to get everyone to shut up once the bowler has started has become the straw that has broken this camel's back.

I *want* him replaced by a hat stand with a TV camera. Farken disgraceful.


Pedro: Kerry O'Keefe suggested that Pawk was invented by a bunch of students hanging off the end of bongs.

Yobbo: It strikes me that the umps could benefit from having a couple of lines actually drawn on the pitch.

S.O.Bruce: Did you hear what happened straight after? The Windies fielders started whooping and hollering like maniacs. Talk about provoking the kiddies. Hat stands for me, too. For Bowden, anyway. Then The Doyen remarked "Who needs to commentate."


Everyone nods gravely when Hawkeye makes a solemn pronouncement, yet my PC has crashed three times this morning. Sheesh.

And Bowden can fuck right off. It's bad enough when the AFL umpires think they're stars these days.


By everyone I trust you mean the Channel Nine turds who are trying to con us into believing Pawk is the business, and not a rank lemon.


The same "everyone" as used in the phrase, "I'm sure everyone would agree that this piece of cricket-themed tat would make a superb addition to any home or bar".


Ahhh, THAT everyone. Framed or Unframed?


Framed. And bearing the genuine signature of Don Bradman's employee.


You mean the employee he ripped off at the Adelaide Stock exchange? That might be worth something, afterall. As would Simon O'Donnell's cowboy hat.

Brett Pee

See. Michael Clarke should NEVER have been dropped.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.


Post a comment

Your Information

(Name and email address are required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)