Skip to main content ↑ ↓
Topic: Smith's Crew in SA (Read 81736 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 9 Guests are viewing this topic.

Re: Smith's Crew in SA

Reply #285 –
Quote from: maxm68 on
Maybe Smith and Warner manned up and decided to take all the heat ? Because its pretty hard to believe Starc Hazelwood etc didnt know what was going on...

We will have to wait till Warners interview or book to find out ????

Given Starc and Hazlewood are the bowlers being helped in the main by the ball tampering I find it hard to believe they didnt know what was going on..think Michael Clarke suggested
the dressing rooms in SA are on the small side so there wouldnt be many secrets..

I'm sure Warner will do the book, 60 minutes interview and slam everything about South African cricket on his return.....maybe do all that after laying low for a while, he might wait until that IPL contract is safe...
Wonder if he had to give that LG TV back?  ;)

Re: Smith's Crew in SA

Reply #286 –
Quote from: ElwoodBlues1 on
Given Starc and Hazlewood are the bowlers being helped in the main by the ball tampering I find it hard to believe they didnt know what was going on..think Michael Clarke suggested
the dressing rooms in SA are on the small side so there wouldnt be many secrets..

I'm sure Warner will do the book, 60 minutes interview and slam everything about South African cricket on his return.....maybe do all that after laying low for a while, he might wait until that IPL contract is safe...
Wonder if he had to give that LG TV back?  ;)

Not sure Starc has benefited too much in the last two tests.
3/300
 

Re: Smith's Crew in SA

Reply #287 –
Quote from: JonHenry on
Not sure Starc has benefited too much in the last two tests.
3/300
Had a big say in the first test win though.
I spent most of my money on Women and grog.
The rest I just wasted.

Re: Smith's Crew in SA

Reply #288 –
So, from the investigation

"The investigation revealed that then vice-captain David Warner was behind the plan to alter the condition of the ball, enlisting opening batting partner Cameron Bancroft with carrying it out.

Steve Smith was aware of the plan, but failed to step in and prevent it from actually happening out in the middle of Newlands."

As Warnie has said, there can be no possible reason for Sutherland to not tell the absolute truth (from what they have anyway) in this, so as this sounds like a hastily cobbled together plan in the minutes leading up to the end of the lunch break it is entirely feasable the bowlers were not involved.  Smith from the sounds of it, just did not put a stop to it ....and that is his fault & he's got to wear it.

12 month ban....CA pandering to the baying of the media again, just like when they dropped the charges against Harbajan for abusing Symo.  Ask Ponting about CAs support for our cricketers someday & see what response you get.

I wonder if KP & Vaughan will be issuing an apology to Lehman now ?........

Mind you, Lehman still has to take responsibility for the culture that lead to this.  I'd love Punta to take charge quite frankly.  But I'm not sure he'd have the time to devote to the role full time.  He'd certainly be a better option than Langer with respect to him as a player.



Life is pain....... anyone who says differently is selling something.

Re: Smith's Crew in SA

Reply #289 –
Quote from: sandsmere on
Had a big say in the first test win though.

Firstly, I doubt it offers any real benefit at all, morons doing moronic stuff. It's not like the Pakistanis using bottle tops to really gouge the ball surface. Even if they had 40, 60 or 80 grit they would be smoothing out the lumps and crevices that benefit the bowler. Mostly likely it was a piece of 200 grit they often use to clean bat faces.

Secondly, I doubt it was happening in the first test, if it was happening back then or in the Ashes there would now be video footage coming out of it all over the place. FFS, they are not brain surgeons, they used a bright yellow piece of sandpaper, they should have just stuck up a neon sign!
The Force Awakens!

Re: Smith's Crew in SA

Reply #290 –
The sandpaper element raises a lot more questions... none of them good.

Re: Smith's Crew in SA

Reply #292 –
Quote from: LP on
Firstly, I doubt it offers any real benefit at all, morons doing moronic stuff. It's not like the Pakistanis using bottle tops to really gouge the ball surface. Even if they had 40, 60 or 80 grit they would be smoothing out the lumps and crevices that benefit the bowler. Mostly likely it was a piece of 200 grit they often use to clean bat faces.

Secondly, I doubt it was happening in the first test, if it was happening back then or in the Ashes there would now be video footage coming out of it all over the place. FFS, they are not brain surgeons, they used a bright yellow piece of sandpaper, they should have just stuck up a neon sign!

Isn’t reverse swing achieved by loading one side of the ball with moisture?  Sandpapering the ball would make the surface more absorbent.
“Why don’t you knock it off with them negative waves? Why don’t you dig how beautiful it is out here? Why don’t you say something righteous and hopeful for a change?”  Oddball

Re: Smith's Crew in SA

Reply #294 –
Quote from: DJC on
Isn’t reverse swing achieved by loading one side of the ball with moisture?  Sandpapering the ball would make the surface more absorbent.

Roughing one side can really make it reverse swing as can using sugary mints on the shiny side, like the Poms did in 2005.

Re: Smith's Crew in SA

Reply #295 –
Quote from: DJC on
Isn’t reverse swing achieved by loading one side of the ball with moisture?  Sandpapering the ball would make the surface more absorbent.

I think it's easier to think about golf balls.

How do golf balls work, imagine if you created a golf ball with dimples on only one hemisphere?

The dimples on a golf ball work by trapping air in the pits which is dragged along with the ball acting like a low friction boundary layer between the ball and the air, an air lubricant. That is why a dimpled golf ball travels further and straighter, and why the golf authorities regulate the allowed patterns. At one stage manufacturers were proposing asymmetrical dimple patterns that allowed you to set up for fade or draw generated by the orientation of the dimples. They have been outlawed.

You can make any cricket ball swing as long as you create a physical asymmetry between the two hemispheres, you are effectively forming a wing with one side super-lubricated by the air boundary layer and the other exposed to friction. Then it becomes the bowlers skill to orientate the wing correctly relative to the direction of release.

There is no right or wrong way, if you know the basics you can create swing either towards or away from the polished side. Often when bowlers cannot get the ball to swing trying it backwards to the way they normally swing the ball will work.

The mechanism of conventional and reverse swing is exactly the same, it's just that the asymmetry is caused by different effects, as the ball gets older the effects of the seam orientation diminish and the asymmetry is caused by changes in the surface areas.

You are correct about the liquid, loading one side of the ball with lots of moisture also causes an asymmetry, but if you are looking for reverse swing this can act in opposition to the roughing effects. You do not want to increase the surface area of both sides at the same time. If you really want reverse swing you need to keep the polished side smooth and dry to minimise it's surface area, and the unpolished side to become as ragged as possible to maximise it's surface area. This effective difference in surface area of the two sides creates a wing. The 1/2 taped up tennis ball behavior, which is like a golf ball with dimples on only one hemisphere. Loading the polished side with too much moisture causes it to also expand, reducing the area difference between hemispheres.

As I posted earlier, any swing bowler who sees a fielder using saliva on the polished side should punch them in the face, if will effectively be reducing or delaying the amount of reverse swing you can get, it's a problem if the plan isn't well coordinated!

What the Aussies did has little benefit, the sort of trivial sanding they attempted would remove pits and peaks making the roughness similar without introducing a significant change in surface area.

I suppose if they did this enough in conjunction with saliva on the polished side they would eventually grind enough of the ball away get a asymmetry but it's a hell of a long way around a very simple problem! No wonder the bowlers were furious, what the trio had planned was probably counteracting what the bowlers had been taught to do, this would probably mean the reverse swing would start much later in the innings.

All this plays out when choosing a new ball. Batsmen / Captains will often search through a box of balls and find a ball that looks symmetrical about a proud seam, or a ball that appears slightly barbell shaped. That is a ball that is good for seaming or spin bowling but not for swing. The best ball for swing is the one that looks like it has one hemisphere larger than the other in addition to a proud seam, because that ball will most likely behave through all phases of the game with the desired characteristics.
The Force Awakens!

Re: Smith's Crew in SA

Reply #297 –
That might be correct Jimbo - ultimately I don’t think Smith is a bad egg... his punishment is massive, if he cops it on the chin he will be back in 12 months.

Re: Smith's Crew in SA

Reply #298 –
Quote from: Bear on
That might be correct Jimbo - ultimately I don’t think Smith is a bad egg... his punishment is massive, if he cops it on the chin he will be back in 12 months.

He should probably appeal, because the magnitude of the penalty is potentially excessive relative to say du Plessis.

I won't be surprised to find Warner appealing, and if he is successful Smith and Bancroft will automatically get a reduced penalty. But I think the lawyers would probably want Smith to appeal and let Warner and Bancroft be the silent beneficiaries. It won't be hard to legally paint Smith as the Captain who went down with the ship, and suggest the penalty is excessive!

Personally, I think the CA penalty is a bit like the way Carlton dealt with the Mitch Robinson, it isn't just about the act it is about the lie! Boof's recent media statements seem to make that clear, he has come across as genuinely offended, and that is consistent with the bowlers reaction over the last few days.

I suspect that when they were first planning this act if they had also made a consistent plan about what to do if caught they would probably be facing a lower penalty. Am I too kind?

btw., I think it feels about right, but then CheatsFC only got 12 months for pumping exotic foreign and possibly toxic substances into the veins of the Dirty 34 young men! It seems very disappointing to see Hird returning to the AFL so soon, will BumberT be next? Smith might we feel aggrieved!
The Force Awakens!

Re: Smith's Crew in SA

Reply #299 –
We're a funny lot
With these type of issues there is always that an initial condemnation...as I said before it's part of our make-up to roast our own if we think they deserve it.
We hold them to a higher standard
But there is also a side of us that says...OK that's enough, they've been punished sufficiently.
I reckon we're just about to enter that phase and it wouldn't surprise in the next few days to see a shift in tone, at least amongst the public...not so sure about sponsors etc as they'll be more concerned about their brand