PhoenixFire
International Coach
I'm not quite sure how anyone can deny that there was nothing other than a fairly big edge (comparible).
-
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** West Indies in England***
- Thread starter GIMH
- Start date
Richard
Cricket Web Staff Member
Sound doesn't disappear whether it hits the back of the bat or the edge. If it had hit anything Snicko WOULD have picked it up.
Replays cannot show an edge unless it's a big one.
Shaggy Alfresco
State Captain
Yes, it was a fairly big one.
Tom Halsey
International Coach
Well given snicko showed nothing IMO it wasn't certain. If they'd just put Hotspot on it, it'd be shown to be an edge (or otherwise) beyond any reasonable doubt. If it hit the back of the bat then just put hotspot on it from behind or whatever.
PhoenixFire
International Coach
IMO, it clearly deviated from it's natural route, and was a certain nick. Not complaining though.
Tom Halsey
International Coach
Yes, but if it had have been edged, there would have been a sound. Ah well, this is going round in circles, the main point is Hotspot should have been used.
UncleTheOne
U19 Captain
they couldn't use hotspot though because it hit the back of the bat, they explained this afterwards in the studio. the replay from behind showed quite clearly that it hit cooks bat.
Shaggy Alfresco
State Captain
But they don't have two hotspot cameras, so they couldn't. The ball hit the back of the bat, a region where hotspot wasn't covering.
Tom Halsey
International Coach
Heh, ok. The replay showed quite clearly that the ball moved, which could quite easily be because it swung after passing the bat, which happens. The fact that there wasn't any noise whatsoever makes me suspicious, however I'm not completely certain whether he hit it or not.
grecian
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Agreed. it wasn't the certainty it's being made out to be, IMO.
Shaggy Alfresco
State Captain
But the replay clearly showed it hitting the back of the bat.
Tom Halsey
International Coach
No it didn't, it showed it was close, all you can see is the ball changing direction, which as has been said, could be down to swing. You can't really tell 100% purely visually - you need sound too generally, and the fact that there was no sound makes me think he might not have hit it.
You can talk about replays as much as you like, if there isn't any sound, then it isn't certain that he's hit it.
Richard
Cricket Web Staff Member
I don't see how a replay can show such a thing, unless there is a change of direction of the instant rather than gradual type. And (as Halz has sort of already pointed-out) the ball arced around, rather than being knocked from one course to another. Which makes me think it was to do with swing rather than an edge.
With no sound, I see no reason that an edge can have happened, as an edge always makes a noise.
Shaggy Alfresco
State Captain
So why did the wicketkeeper and all the fieldsmen behind the bat instantly go up for the appeal, while the batsman looked behind to see if it had been caught?
Pup Clarke
Cricketer Of The Year
Your club side was worse then that.
Richard
Cricket Web Staff Member
Batsmen look behind pretty well every time the ball goes behind the wicket regardless of whether they've thick-edged it right along the ground or missed it by a mile, and fielders appeal for stuff that hasn't hit the bat (the bowler does sometimes too... which he didn't in this case) plenty as well.