• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

***Official*** India in South Africa

Pratters

Pratters

Cricket, Lovely Cricket
adharcric said:
He was the leading wicket-taker in that division.
Click to expand...
As I said, he took loads of wickets. However, his stats were not at all impressive.

2006 (England) 3712 132 2268 78 9-138 29.07 5 2

29 in division 2 is NOT proving yourself. Also, look at how low Zaheer stands in the combined Div A plus Div 2 averages list.
 
silentstriker

silentstriker

The Wheel is Forever
In the resulting pandemonium, VVS Laxman and Sourav Ganguly were asked to pad up. Out of the field, Daryl Harper informed Graeme Smith that the delay was a result of unforeseen circumstances and not a deliberate tactic. In the spirit of the game, he requested Smith not to appeal for a Timed-Out dismissal. Smith agreed.​

Well, that explains that.
 
Slow Love™

Slow Love™

International Captain
silentstriker said:
In the resulting pandemonium, VVS Laxman and Sourav Ganguly were asked to pad up. Out of the field, Daryl Harper informed Graeme Smith that the delay was a result of unforeseen circumstances and not a deliberate tactic. In the spirit of the game, he requested Smith not to appeal for a Timed-Out dismissal. Smith agreed.​

Well, that explains that.
Click to expand...
Interesting. As long as it's a genuine request that Smith could accept or reject (rather than an order), I don't think I have a problem with it. You would expect that this could only be the case though if the umpires were taking responsibility for the screwup themselves.
 
silentstriker

silentstriker

The Wheel is Forever
Slow Love™ said:
Interesting. As long as it's a genuine request that Smith could accept or reject (rather than an order), I don't think I have a problem with it. You would expect that this could only be the case though if the umpires were taking responsibility for the screwup themselves.
Click to expand...
Yup, I agree.
 
Pratters

Pratters

Cricket, Lovely Cricket
Slow Love™ said:
I get the sense that the umpires told the South Africans that they wouldn't give the incoming batsman out timed-out, as the error had been theirs, but I'm not certain of that. I guess it comes down to whose responsibility it is to track how long before a player can come back out onto the field after spending some time off it. Is that the umpire's sole responsibility or are the teams expected to know?

I tend to agree with adharcric that, rightly or wrongly, it must have been discussed off field with the third or fourth umpire (or the ref), because it did seem like Ganguly offered no explanation. It will be very interesting to hear South Africa's side of all this. If they simply chose not to appeal, that resolves the issue. But if the umpires advised them not to, it's all a bit of a screwup on their (the umpires) part.
Click to expand...
Yeah well summed up. Adharcric, SL .. I do think the players/teams should know the rule as well as to when they can come out as the rule book would clearly spell out regarding how many minutes some one cannot come out I would imagine.

However, does the rule book also state that the umpires should inform the players? Obviously I haven't learnt the rule book by heart so I do not know. Pat Symcox in the commentary box said - could the Indians have not figured out in 12 hours? Not sure if Symcox would know the rule book by heart as well though.

The umpires adjust their watches with the time visible to every one on the ground and so the official time is not a secret.

The main ambiguity is why it went so normally once Ganguly came out to bat which opens up the questions you ask in the last paragraph.

As Bhogle said, all sorts of theories are floating around.. :)
 
adharcric

adharcric

International Coach
Slow Love™ said:
Interesting. As long as it's a genuine request that Smith could accept or reject (rather than an order), I don't think I have a problem with it. You would expect that this could only be the case though if the umpires were taking responsibility for the screwup themselves.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I'm pretty sure the umpires realized that they screwed up and asked Smith not to appeal because of that. I just had a look at the laws about players leaving and returning to the field and about batsmen being timed out. The vague implication is that the umpires are responsible for allowing the player when he can return to the field, but it really should be defined more clearly. Bizarre situation.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top