**Official Comm Bank Series - Aus, Ind & SL ODI's***

[Burgey]

Would have given it out myself too Spark but at the same time its piss funny to see Dhoni lose it.

Loss of concentration from Hussey rather than anything more sinister I'd wager, you don't want to be hit by the ball when its going at you at speed so... I still reckon he's shielding himself but by the letter of the law he should have been gone.

Still if its intent to change the path of the ball to avoid been run out rather than avoiding getting hit then would it still be out? A lot of this comes down to the umpires discretion anyway in the match situation.

I think it would have been handled ball more than obstructing the field.

Then again, doesn't the obstruction law say "other than a hand not on his bat", yet handled the ball excludes trying to avoid injury? Be weird if there's some loop hole it falls within.

 

[Burgey]

If you have got away with 'em for 6 years...

But I call people out on them here, Shri....

 

[Spikey]

jesus christ wade. That's also very dodgy

 

[HeathDavisSpeed]

imagine this:

a batsman is batting without a helmet, and is running across the pitch, trying to make his ground. an incredibly shoddy throw from the fielder has the batsman's head in the firing line. out of sheer reflex, the batsman hits the ball out of the way of his face.

that would be out, right?

Yes, but the question is whether the fielding side would appeal. Every time the batsman picks up the ball to give it back to the fielding side, in theory that is obstructing the field, but generally you don't appeal. Or the batsman asks whether he can pick it up. Wilful obstruction should be given out.

 

[Burgey]

dont blame dhoni for losing it that was some of the most biased umpiring i have seen in decades there needs to be an inquiry about it tbh

Yeah, well known Australian umpire Billy Bowden plainly biased.

 

[Contra]

Terrible post.

Nice reasoning.

 

[Spikey]

I mean, if a player appealed for that I would have given that out too. Cheating Vics.....

 

[Cruxdude]

jesus christ wade. That's also very dodgy

Yeah didn't he change his path to hide the stumps there? That whole rule is very arbitrary and impossible to enforce.

 

[Burgey]

Yes, but the question is whether the fielding side would appeal. Every time the batsman picks up the ball to give it back to the fielding side, in theory that is obstructing the field, but generally you don't appeal. Or the batsman asks whether he can pick it up. Wilful obstruction should be given out.

They just read out the handled ball rule on the radio, and it said its not out if you're trying to protect yourself

 

[biased indian]

imagine this:

a batsman is batting without a helmet, and is running across the pitch, trying to make his ground. an incredibly shoddy throw from the fielder has the batsman's head in the firing line. out of sheer reflex, the batsman hits the ball out of the way of his face.

that would be out, right?

That won't be out if you apply common sense hussey was out if you had applied the same today.has to say it was bull ****
Umpiring

 

[Viscount Tom]

dont blame dhoni for losing it that was some of the most biased umpiring i have seen in decades there needs to be an inquiry about it tbh

At whart point did I blame Dhoni for losing it? I just stated that I found it funny that he did as I often do when players lose their cool. Its not always funny and their outrage is sometimes justified as it was here.

Also the cost of jetsetting a multitude of neutral umpires round the world isn't worth it, just make sure the umpires are of the highest quality and you will be fine at this level its not just the players that get exposed.

 

[Burgey]

Nice reasoning.

The reason being I thought it was a terrible post.

 

[DingDong]

shocking stuff by taufel and fry with bowden obviously tagging along

 

[Hurricane]

Third umpire decision wasn't it?

They (the commentators) said it was the 3rd umpire but you could see Taufel giving his opinion and shaking his head and talking to Bowden so it was unclear how the decision was finally reached.

I don't agree with non neutral umpires anyway so I have a pre-existing bias to my posts.

 

[Shri]

But I call people out on them here, Shri....

I am not sure how to respond to that question so I am just going to leave this here:

 

[pup11]

The Dussey thing was surely out according to the new rules but the rule is pretty stupid in the first place and just opens up a grey area in the game, this incident was a case of Duss blocking a ball that was going to hit him on the chops had he just run through.

 

[Hurricane]

Also the cost of jetsetting a multitude of neutral umpires round the world isn't worth it, just make sure the umpires are of the highest quality and you will be fine at this level its not just the players that get exposed.

Is worth jetsetting them around IMHO just to remove the perception of possible bias. The elite umpires have been complaining about the amount of travel however.

 

[DingDong]

At whart point did I blame Dhoni for losing it? I just stated that I found it funny that he did as I often do when players lose their cool. Its not always funny and their outrage is sometimes justified as it was here.

Either way they'vre got the Aussies 4 down and aren't bowling well enough at the moment to back up these bits of fielding.

Also the cost of jetsetting a multitude of neutral umpires round the world isn't worth it, just make sure the umpires are of the highest quality and you will be fine at this level its not just the players that get exposed.

i was saying that i dont blame dhoni for losing it

yeah umpiring standards are pretty poor around the world anyway with sl, aus and ind umpiring being completely below standard i'm glad guys like harper and de silva finally got kicked out of the panel because they were clearly there due to politics

 

[HeathDavisSpeed]

They just read out the handled ball rule on the radio, and it said its not out if you're trying to protect yourself

Yep - not out handled the ball. However, the Obstructing the Field Law doesn't have an 'avoiding injury' exclusion and is equally, if not more so given the substance of the appeal, relevant.

 

[Burgey]

I am not sure how to respond to that question so I am just going to leave this here:

You can happily respond to it elsewhere, I imagine