Cricket | PUNT ROAD END | Richmond Tigers Forum
  • IMPORTANT // Please look after your loved ones, yourself and be kind to others. If you are feeling that the world is too hard to handle there is always help - I implore you not to hesitate in contacting one of these wonderful organisations Lifeline and Beyond Blue ... and I'm sure reaching out to our PRE community we will find a way to help. T.

Cricket

Another contentious decision goes the Poms way.
If anyone saw that caught behind decision, that the ump gave out, then Poms asked for a review, during the review the HOT SPOT camera from front on was not used, only the side on from square leg, what the hell is the point in that camera angle?? Why wasn't the front on shot used? They used it for 'snicko' and 'snicko' indicated he hit it. So the 3rd ump can't decide and refers back to the umps decision... then the ump reverses his decision. Bloody ridiculous.
 
Agreed. Surely Alim Dar (spelling?) should have reverted back to his original decision of OUT. But I still can't work out why the HOT SPOT camera was not used in conjuction with snicko.
 
IanG said:
The ABC comms said it was fair enough that he was given not out. So are you guys saying Bell was actually out?
Click to expand...

Snicko showed clearly that there was a faint edge, hot spot was inconclusive. It should have gone with the original call, like inconclusive LBW reviews are.
 
I reckon it was a fair use of the laws as they are set out, they used a tactical review and it came off. Make a change and players will game it, it is the nature of sport.

The sooner they get rid of players being able to question the umpire's decision and just make the technology available on the umpire's request, the better.
 
mld said:
I reckon it was a fair use of the laws as they are set out, they used a tactical review and it came off. Make a change and players will game it, it is the nature of sport.

The sooner they get rid of players being able to question the umpire's decision and just make the technology available on the umpire's request, the better.
Click to expand...

Very true, agree with this
 
mb64 said:
What happened TD?
Click to expand...
Tigerdog said:
Another contentious decision goes the Poms way.
If anyone saw that caught behind decision, that the ump gave out, then Poms asked for a review, during the review the HOT SPOT camera from front on was not used, only the side on from square leg, what the hell is the point in that camera angle?? Why wasn't the front on shot used? They used it for 'snicko' and 'snicko' indicated he hit it. So the 3rd ump can't decide and refers back to the umps decision... then the ump reverses his decision. Bloody ridiculous.
Click to expand...

His original decision should have stood just like in an LBW decision as mld said here :
mld said:
Snicko showed clearly that there was a faint edge, hot spot was inconclusive. It should have gone with the original call, like inconclusive LBW reviews are.
Click to expand...
 
mld said:
I reckon it was a fair use of the laws as they are set out, they used a tactical review and it came off. Make a change and players will game it, it is the nature of sport.
Click to expand...

OK but its still cheating.
 
IanG said:
OK but its still cheating.
Click to expand...

Is not walking after edging the ball cheating? If so everyone bar Gilly is a cheat.

mb64 said:
Based on what l'm reading the original decision should have stood.
Click to expand...

It should have but he changed his mind for some reason. Maybe he took too much notice of hot spot and too much notice of Bellend's reaction.
 
snaps truly said:
Is not walking after edging the ball cheating? If so everyone bar Gilly is a cheat.
Click to expand...

Its a fine line but waiting for the umpires decision is more of a passive thing, the batsman isn't doing anything except wait for the umpires decision he isn't trying to pro-actively game the system. If Bell knew he was out then what he did was on a par with a fielder claiming a catch he knew hit the ground.
 
IanG said:
Its a fine line but waiting for the umpires decision is more of a passive thing, the batsman isn't doing anything except wait for the umpires decision he isn't trying to pro-actively game the system. If Bell knew he was out then what he did was on a par with a fielder claiming a catch he knew hit the ground.
Click to expand...

I see your point but not walking is simply allowing the umpire to make the final judgement. If he doesn't give you out you stay, to me that is 'gaming it' or working inside the rules. Same as Bell did. Don't bloody like it though, we should go back to the umpires cocking it up three or four times out of ten on their own, then at least the heat is only on the umpires and not the players, or....the umpires could use the technology correctly, stinking decision. Because of it England probably won't have to bat again.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
< Lowlife of the week award. | NFL & NCAA Football Threads >
Top Bottom