*Official* Second Test at Lords

[Richard]

God you talk some rubbish sometimes.

Nah, I don't - and I certainly didn't there. You find me one instance of a referred catch being given out and I'll retract that.

 

[Neil Pickup]

That is quite possibly the worst justification I've read. You couldn't possibly tell me that the field umpires had a better chance of making a correct decision than a camera slowed down to about a quarter of the pace and zoomed in to a foot away.

Cameras are dreadful at low catches. They never, ever take in the full picture of whether the fingers get under them due to the foreshortening of the lens. Channel 4 did a long piece during a lunch break several years ago that demonstrated how a ball with fingers under it looks grounded.

 

[Burgey]

He was, until it didn't suit Australia to do so.

Either way, Hughes can't moan, he was dropped just a few minutes ago. Get out, you're lucky you were even around for that non-catch to be "caught".

Nice logic mate. Batsman gets dropped - fielding mistake. Ball bounces, catch claimed - nothing to complain about. Bizarre? Nah, stark raving mad tbh.

Ponting gave up on the spirit malarky after last week mate.

 

[Matt79]

It's impossible to be both certain and wrong at the same time. He can't have been certain.

Off topic but WTF? What are bizarre position.

 

[biased indian]

@ ponting ..its nice to see him at the reciving end

hmm came online just to type this

 

[Redbacks]

I am usually the first one to have respect for the umpire's decision, but Australia and Rudi are just hopeless this test.

fixed

 

[chalky]

So guessing from that reaction from ppl above, it was not out, right?

Inconclusive - but looking at the precident set yesterday with the Bopara incident should have been given not out.

BTW those who are saying Strauss cheated are well out of order.

 

[S Chanderpaul]

Aussies whinging again.

Some things never change.

 

[Richard]

That is quite possibly the worst justification I've read. You couldn't possibly tell me that the field umpires had a better chance of making a correct decision than a camera slowed down to about a quarter of the pace and zoomed in to a foot away.

Of course they do. Cameras do not give an accurate impression by zooming-in - the image is, so they say, foreshortened. A camera has to be nearer to the action than the Umpire to have a better chance of giving the right impression.

 

[wfdu_ben91]

Flintoff catches most things in his sleep - you expect him to catch both the ones he's put down this series.

So does Ponting, yet he dropped Bopara. Most fielders wouldn't of caught that one that Flintoff dropped. Poor excuse.

 

[TT Boy]

How about you **** off you ****. Obviously wrong as per usual.

Internet hardman, no.

 

[oitoitoi]

If I was an Aussie fan I'd be mightily pissed off at the world, absolutely everything's gone england's way this test, overhead conditions, umpiring decisions, the toss, these poms are certainly getting the rub of the green this series.

 

[Andre]

What most people on here seem to have missed is that it was actually Doctrove who made the decision, Rudi asked him "did you see it carry?" and he said "yes". With Bopara's yesterday, neither Umpire had a sight. So it went upstairs, and, as it always does when it goes upstairs, gets given n\o.

Doesn't wash with me. If either umpire is unsure it should go upstairs, or there should be no referring for catches at all. There needs to be consistency in the use of the technology - if one umpire isn't sure, then it should go upstairs regardless of the other umpires opinion.

I don't see how Doctrove would have had a better view than Rudi either. Infact, from square leg I'd be suprised if he had a great view of first slip diving forward at all.

There needs to be consistency in the decision making, it cannot be pick and choose when to look at something.

 

[Jakester1288]

Interesting point I raised on MSN talking to .matt.

Jake says (9:03 PM):
*I wonder how much the ECB are giving the umpires for this?

Deadset, Hughes and Ponting both not out but given out in the first innings, but given out, then Hauritz catches (but may have dropped) Bopara and it's not out, now Strauss clearly drops Hughes and it's out. Katich was out from a no ball. What next?

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

I'm not a fan of the referral system or the third umpire for decisions that aren't black and white like run-outs etc. What's a bit silly in this whole series of events isn't the fact that the umpires made an incorrect decision on the field, which is part of the game IMO, it's that they didn't refer it when they did refer a catch yesterday under the same circumstances. If you're going to vastly reduce the chance something is going to be given out by referring it, you can't randomly decide to make a half-blind decision next time around.

 

[Top_Cat]

Let's not forget one thing, though; sure the two dismissals have been doubtful but England are creating plenty of chances here and none of the Aussies have looked at ease. No-one can really say they wouldn't have had another non-dodgy one come along so these probably can't be used as justification for the Aussie performances right now and (probable) loss.

 

[Matt79]

Can't blame Strauss though, he probably didn't know.

Don't blame Strauss. I think fielders probAbly usually don't know in these sorts of cases.

 

[wfdu_ben91]

Aussies whinging again.

Some things never change.

Typical Englishmen, talk it up when you're winning but don't show up and support your team when the chips are down. Bandwagoners.

 

[inbox24]

Somebody needs to stand up to these bloody whinging pom s.

 

[Neil Pickup]

I wonder how much the ECB are giving the umpires for this?

Sorry, but deserved. Seriously, rewind to Sydney and Steve Bucknor and HTFU.