fter Dahls leadoff triple in the second, but faltered in Colorados sev

Charles Davis excellent statistical analysis of appeals prompted me to look back on recent internationals and contemplate some hypothetical rule changes that cricket might wish to embrace.I have watched almost every ball of the recent series in India, Australia and New Zealand involving the home teams versus England, South Africa and Pakistan respectively. It is apparent now that the referral process has moved light years away from its original mandate of being a safeguard against the howler. It is now a very valuable strategic tool that can change the momentum of a match if used judiciously (or vice versa - used poorly, it can significantly negatively impact a team). To see Joe Root backing up at the non-strikers end, almost directly in line with the umpire, so he can get a better angle on lbw decisions, presumably to advise his partner on whether to review or not, just shows how the thinking around the DRS has developed an acute strategic focus.The strategic element has come about because of the limited number of unsuccessful referrals available to each team. It is now common to see captains doing the arithmetic to calculate how many overs they have left before they get their full quota of referrals back and then deciding on whether to challenge an umpires decision or not. That pragmatic decision-making process is so far away from the original raison detre of the DRS as to make everything else that sits around it redundant too.Not many teams bowl their allotted overs in the specified time frame anyway, so why persist with the argument that allowing unlimited referrals would slow down the game? It is slow already. Unless the ICC gets serious about enforcing over rates, things wont change much, so why not invest a bit more time in getting every decision correct? Pakistan bowled 30-plus overs of spin on the first day at the Gabba and were still late finishing (even allowing for an injury delay). As it is, umpires make no effort to stop batsmen from changing gloves and taking drinks whenever they want, so clearly they are not serious about enforcing over rates. Some batsmen, like Steve Smith, seem to ask for a change of gloves within a few minutes of the previous change.So if umpires are not sure about a 50-50 call, why not give them the power to check with the third umpire, thereby ensuring the decision arrived at is the correct one? In most other sports, rugby for example, the referee calls for a video replay if he is not sure. Getting decisions correct is more important in most sports than time delays. Except cricket, which continues to pretend to care about punctuality but does very little to meaningfully enforce it.The number of poor referrals makes you wonder why the players are getting it wrong so often, especially when it looks so obvious to those watching at home on television. Perhaps the players themselves are not in the best position to hear nicks or judge angles and height. So if they are penalised by only being allowed to get two referrals wrong every 80 overs in Tests (one per innings in ODIs), should we not also, for the sake of balance, find some way to penalise umpires for getting two wrong decisions in that same time frame? After all, they have the best view in the stadium and their sole job is to concentrate on these matters (not on catching, bowling, batting and so on). If the umpires get it wrong more than x number of times within a specified time frame, how about if both teams get a referral back for that period? It doesnt seem fair otherwise that umpires are allowed to make mistake after mistake and there are no immediate on-field penalties. It got to the point in a recent Test match where the commentators were actually saying on air that the players would be better off not referring a decision made by Richard Kettleborough (because he tended to get it right) and to save their referrals for the other umpire instead. Surely it is a sign that the system is flawed when teams are making strategic decisions about which umpire to target?If an umpire was allowed to ask for a review for lbws and snicks (like they do for run out or stumped), he then makes the correct decision and it eliminates the need for each team to have a quota. Maybe give them one referral per innings, to deal with the absolute shocker, but if they get it wrong, a serious penalty - 25 runs? - is levied.Then theres the other ridiculous rule that if the batsman leaves the field of play, he cannot be recalled. Given that so many of crickets other antiquated laws have changed, this remains a dinosaur in a post-Jurassic world. Surely if there is clear evidence that the batsman should be recalled, why does it matter if hes halfway to the dressing room? The integrity of the correct decision is surely more important than some law from a bygone era that is no longer relevant in a sport where we are now allowed concussion substitutes, and soon even red cards. Another aspect of such situations is that they also have the potential to create bad blood and inflame tensions, especially in the case of fielders claiming low catches, when batsmen are asked to hang around until inconclusive replays are adjudicated on - with the fielding team then rounding on the batsman for supposedly not taking the fielders word that it was a fair catch.There is another aspect to this sort of situation - fielders appear mortally wounded when their integrity is questioned on low catches but have no similar moral conundrums if they appeal for catches that are clearly not out, or lbws that clip the inside edge, or if a batsman nicks the ball and stands impassively defiant when given not out. It appears that within the sport we have different layers of morality.Cheating is a dirty word but not walking when you nick it, shining the ball with a mint sweet, or stealing a yard at the non-strikers end are clearly de rigeur. At the professional level it is no longer a game of honour, governed by rules forged in that spirit. It is a ruthless, cutthroat business, so perhaps the laws need to move even further to ensure that technology allows us to reach the correct decision. What other sport allows the excuse of delays to corrupt the integrity of the decision-making process?Bam Adebayo Jersey . Inter president Erick Thohir says in a club statement on Wednesday that Vidic is "one of the worlds best defenders and his qualities, international pedigree, and charisma will be an asset. Hassan Whiteside Jersey . Coach Mike Munchak says Fokou stretched ligaments in his left knee Oct. 13 against Seattle, which could keep out up to five weeks even though the linebacker didnt need surgery. http://www.cheapheatjerseys.com/?tag=cheap-wayne-ellington-jersey . However, he did make them miss him a little less. Cundiff, who had the unenviable job of replacing Dawson last season, agreed Thursday to a one-year, $1. Josh Richardson Jersey . It might not have mattered. While the Dodgers are preparing for the playoffs, the Padres showed their future has promise behind two rookies. Kelly Olynyk Jersey . With the first unit struggling of late and Amir Johnson - one of the teams iron men - hobbling on an injured right ankle, Patterson knew he could get the nod in a challenging matchup against one of the leagues up and coming players at his position.DENVER -- Ichiro Suzuki nearly got his 3,000th hit and Giancarlo Stanton hit a record-long home run. It should have been a night to celebrate for the Miami Marlins, but the Colorado Rockies relentless offense spoiled the party.Suzuki grounded out in his first try at 3,000 hits and the Marlins, despite a 504-foot home run by Stanton, lost to the Colorado Rockies 12-6 on Saturday night.Charlie Blackmon homered among his four hits and drove in four runs for the Rockies, who moved within three games of the Marlins and St. Louis for the second NL wild-card spot on a night when history was nearly made.I dont know if Ive ever been in a game where Ive seen 3,000 hits, Rockies manager Walt Weiss said. Its a big deal.It didnt seem like Suzuki would have a chance after the Rockies took a 12-3 lead in the seventh, but he had a pinch-hit infield single to lead off the eighth inning for No. 2,999, just beating the throw by Gold Glove third baseman Nolan Arenado. Suzuki stayed in the game to play right field.When I threw it I thought I had him, but like I said, hes too fast, Arenado said. Thats why hes so good.In the ninth, with many in the crowd at Coors Field standing, Suzuki hit a comebacker to Scott Oberg. The 6-foot-2 pitcher reached high to get the ball before it went up the middle and, after dropping the transfer, quickly gathered it to barely throw out Suzuki.I was trying to turn a double play on that, but once I bobbled it, I was just trying to get the out at first base, Oberg said. What hes done in his career has been an outstanding accomplishment. Hes been an inspiration to a lot of players.The 42-year-old Japanese star will become the 30th player in major league history to reach 3,000 with his next hit.You put him in the game when we did theres a little thought that he might get two (at-bats), Miami manager Don Mattingly said. Once he gets that first one, as that inning gets extended, you know hes going to get another AB. The guys were excited to have a chance to see it.Rookie David Dahl had three hits to extend his hitting streak to 12 games and Daniel Descalso drovee in three runs for Colorado, which is 15-7 since the All-Star break.ddddddddddddStantons 23rd homer was the longest in the major leagues this season and the longest in Coors Field history. Suzuki batted for the All-Star Home Run Derby champion in the eighth.Stanton, who flew out on a 3-0 pitch in the third, connected in the fifth on an 89 mph changeup from Chad Bettis (10-6), sending a drive into the seats in left-center field for a 3-2 lead.I wasnt happy with my 3-0 swing, Stanton said. It was a good swing but not the type of attack you should have with that so I said if he throws me that again Im going to do what I should have done 3-0 and he did.Hall of Fame catcher Mike Piazza held the record for the longest homer at Coors, hitting a 496-footer in 1997 when he was with the Los Angeles Dodgers.This was the second time Stanton crushed a ball in Denver. He hit a home run 494 feet in 2012.It put us in a good place but didnt seem to work out, Stanton said.Andrew Cashner (4-8) retired 10 straight after Dahls leadoff triple in the second, but faltered in Colorados seven-run sixth. The Rockies got five straight hits and a walk off the righty to take a 7-2 lead, and they tagged reliever Mike Dunn for three more runs.The Rockies sent 13 batters to the plate in the inning, which ended with reliever Nefi Ogando striking out Carlos Gonzalez with the bases loaded.We want to play out front and our offense is helping us do that, Weiss said. At the same time were getting good starting pitching. We got a long way to go. We got a lot more games to win, but its been nice seeing our guys fight their way back in the mix here.STILL STREAKINGDahls streak is the second longest by a Rockies rookie to begin a career. Juan Pierre reached 16 in 2000. ... Gonzalez also had two hits to reach 17 straight games. His is the longest current streak in the majors.UP NEXTThe Marlins will send LHP Adam Conley (7-6, 3.41) against Colorados Jon Gray (8-4, 3.77) on Sunday. ' ' '