Ok, was THAT catch out or not? | Final Word Ashes Daily

The Ashes, 2nd Test at Lord's, Day 4: The days don't get any quieter. Bouncer wars. Bizarro Steve Smith stuff. Nathan Lyon batting on one leg. A late burst from Mitchell Starc, a late burst from Pat Cummins. Another controversial catch, or non catch. The chance of a big chase, still alive overnight, with Ben Stokes still there. We had it all.

Join this channel to get access to perks:

[martinkirk]

Hugely impressed with Lyon going out to bat, I hope it didn't do any extra damage to him. Between that and Smith in 2019, Lords seems to really showcase some Aussie grit!

[thatsbollox]

The stupidity of over-analysing these catches is already coming back to haunt them. Every time they make a stupid technical decision it makes it worse for the future.
Now what will happen is every single obvious catch will get analysed and more stupid decisions made. Then more rule changes and more analysis. For nothing.
We know when its a catch and when it isnt. It has become utterly ridiculous bordering on the moronic if that catch is denied.

[casttolast]

For me no controversy over that catch at all. Not out any day of the week. Nicely explained by the guy with glasses. In contrast the other guy speed waffling to explain his point of view with the result that an umpire wouldn't know what to do.
I couldn't understand why Starc hadn't turned his wrist upwards (very good catch up to this point) as he hit the deck. Then the first guy explained its a clever way of stopping the ball jarring out of the hand! Nuff said!

[libertineish]

Lyon's most staisfying boundary since last week Geoff 😉

[bics-tcvr]

Not controversial. Remember a semi final where the guy had caught it and dropped it during the celebration? I was always taught to have skin under the ball. You could never use the ball to break your fall. Your job as a fielder is to stop the ball touching the ground. That's the hard bit and thems the laws of the sport.
I'm pretty sure England will lose but if the Aussies are worried about that then that's a great sign that the Aussies are running scared. Never seen them looking panicked like this and they really don't need to. The have is in the bag.

[Digs-dr]

"A skinny underdog striking a solitary blow on one leg? Call him Daniel LaRusso." Hook it up to my veins Geoff.

[_tm]

It was CLEARLY OUT! Seems like Marais Erasmus glasses slipped on Lord's "slope". Australia has been robbed of a late wicket.

[disturbingdevelopment]

Great convo. Not sure about the bouncer barrage...been there...done that. It really relies on a two-paced wicket, fit bowlers over 5 days and cool weather. Try doing that in Australia in 40C heat. Green batted really well until he didn't; Head looked like a walking wicket.

[normanjulian]

Check his grip on the ball. Fully in control with fingers 75% around the ball. In control as far as I can see.

[riaanenyolande]

If you are going to make the rules too technical you will always have issues. Just stay with keep the ball off the ground. If you are going to say 2 or second control it is just going to confuse. Keep it off ground complete the move get up celebrate. Keep it easy. It was very athletic.

[Rickxta]

As an Aussie, when first saw the close- up of the catch ( it was a catch, but not a wicket) I thought, “Ooh, that doesn’t look real good.” My mind went to the Aussie women’s relay swimming team a few years ago who had the fastest time but not the win because members jumped back in the pool to join the final swimmer.

[Deadlyspark]

Always a catch for mine. Never seen it called not out in all my watching. Control of the ball was never in doubt and i think thats all that should count. As for control of his body? He wasnt flailing like smith, or flying horizontal like green, so he seems well in control of his body, far more so than previous declared catches

[juztvin]

Lol, it's funny. When Green caught Gill in exactly the same way, you guys said it was clearly out and the right decision was taken.

[connorism]

I'd have given that out lol. It's a strange rule, but I guess there's a case for it.

[RogueAI]

Obscure reference with the Elefant Traks tshirt, nice.

[markritchie]

Consider this, a fielder takes a catch along the boundary and his momentum propelling him over the boundary or on the rope it is not out. Same as Starc’s non catch. Stunning lack of knowledge of the rules by the Australians.

[davidjames]

The action was completed when he transferred the ball from two hands to one hand.

[JitendraPatel-cibl]

That was perfect catch umpire needs to go to specsavers and eyes check out and go to neurologist to get his brain tested gaffa

[abhinavrathor]

Well cricket's rules are so complicated that even long time followers can't agree on many things. I thought it was not out. I don't think it should be deemed that someone is under control of the ball unless the motion to gather the ball has been completed. Stark was near the boundary. Imagine he had taken the same catch and then slid along like he did to have is toe touch the boundary rope. Would that be out then or a six? I would argue a six which means the ball would be considered still in play.

[curtrosmamn]

Clearly Starc was having an “out of body” experience! 🤭