• 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* New Zealand in Zimbabwe

BoyBrumby

Englishman
What ddoes the replay say?
Not out. Man, I dunno. Side on seemed to introduce an element of doubt that there wasn't in the first couple of angles.

Huge call. Martin having an extended word with Taylor in his follow through. Bot of edge creeping in.
 

NUFAN

Y no Afghanistan flag
Such a poor decision really. Benefit of the doubt should go with the umpire in decisions like this one; not the batsman.
 

Flem274*

123/5
I choose to laugh this off and pray Australia underestimate us and we can pull a Zimbabwe on them. We have a Taylor too.:(
 

KiWiNiNjA

International Coach
That's ridiculous.

How can you even refer a catch like that with two blurry camera angles so far away. It's never really conclusive, take the word of the fielder FFS.
 

Prince EWS

Global Moderator
Such a poor decision really. Benefit of the doubt should go with the umpire in decisions like this one; not the batsman.
The umpire didn't give him out though. Replace "umpire" with "fielder" in your post and I agree completely.

I don't really have an opinion either way on the catch because my video quality is far too terrible but if it was close then we should go by the fielder's word IMO.
 

NUFAN

Y no Afghanistan flag
The umpire didn't give him out though. Replace "umpire" with "fielder" in your post and I agree completely.

I don't really have an opinion either way on the catch because my video quality is far too terrible but if it was close then we should go by the fielder's word IMO.
Yeah true. I figure the umpire thought it was probably out though, but figured that they better go up to the 3rd umpire just in case.

I don't completely agree with accepting the fielder in catches like this one. Or should I say near catches..
 

Flem274*

123/5
I know this should be more humiliating than Bangladesh giving us a scare a couple of years ago, but it's only the bowling that has me fuming. Vettori had to do most of the work against Bangladesh, but in the first three innings most of the team contributed. I know I had a rage in the other thread, but Zimbabwe are also batting really, really well.

I actually think this is more convincing for Zimbabwe because it isn't Vettori vs Shakib with 20 extras.
 

Prince EWS

Global Moderator
Yeah true. I figure the umpire thought it was probably out though, but figured that they better go up to the 3rd umpire just in case.

I don't completely agree with accepting the fielder in catches like this one. Or should I say near catches..
The umpire was clearly in no position to make a decision though given it was four fifths of the way to boundary. You have to either give the BOTD to the fielder or the batsman really - or just man up and have the third umpire make a close call, which is what I think they've done here. Not that I'm saying they've made the right one.
 

Top_Cat

Request Your Custom Title Now!
I don't really have an opinion either way on the catch because my video quality is far too terrible but if it was close then we should go by the fielder's word IMO.
Crazy talk. Srs. If I was Taylor in a tense Test, no way would I take the word of some **** claiming a catch.
 

Top