01-08-2026, 07:33 AM
(01-08-2026, 04:09 AM)Baggiedownunder Wrote:(01-08-2026, 12:57 AM)rsbaggy2 Wrote: Snicko not fit for purpose.
That is not in doubt.
But even so all you can ask for is consistency when referrals are made. Snicko showed a spike just after passing Weatherald's bat. Following on from Stokes dismissal in a previous test in similar circumstances surely the same logic should have applied here?
The fact it wasn't given out is a disgrace.
It didn’t spike it shown a thickening however agree it isn’t fit for purpose.
It was the reason for a 4-1 defeat
Whatever the deficiencies of Snicko it was not the reason for England's capitulation. Think like that only excuses the ill preparation, poor discipline and arrogance and poor performances of the team.
What you're implying is nonsense. England lost the series due to their own shortfalls. To blame anything else is frankly ludicrous.

