• 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* Fourth Test at the MCG

GIMH

GIMH

Norwood's on Fire
Riggins said:
I don't see how that counts as conclusive evidence. Probably the right decision made.
Click to expand...
I kind of agree - but it's got to a point with edge reviews that I think you've got to see daylight between bat and ball for them to see it as 'conclusive'.

I know we gotta favour the umpire's decision if there is nothing definitive but common sense has to prevail. For me it's a case of, when using the tech to review an edge (or alleged edge) that was originally called out, is there any evidence that could point to an out? If the answer is no then that's conclusive enough for me.
 
GIMH

GIMH

Norwood's on Fire
Look I know he's struggled in these series but can I just say

Joe Root>Steve Smith

Better batsman, better bowler, better looking

Thanks
 
hazsa19

hazsa19

International Regular
GIMH said:
I kind of agree - but it's got to a point with edge reviews that I think you've got to see daylight between bat and ball for them to see it as 'conclusive'.

I know we gotta favour the umpire's decision if there is nothing definitive but common sense has to prevail. For me it's a case of, when using the tech to review an edge (or alleged edge) that was originally called out, is there any evidence that could point to an out? If the answer is no then that's conclusive enough for me.
Click to expand...
I think they've started using a pretty simple formula. If one of hot spot or snicko indicates an edge then and only then is it out.
 
GIMH

GIMH

Norwood's on Fire
Thinking about it, the Perth review from Root was poor so I must have been thinking of something else. Ajdude's point still very much stands like.
 
Spark

Spark

Global Moderator
hazsa19 said:
I think they've started using a pretty simple formula. If one of hot spot or snicko indicates an edge then and only then is it out.
Click to expand...
Really, it's just an extension of how umpiring has worked for 150 years, isn't it? If there's a noise as ball passes bat then it's out
 
Adders

Adders

Cricketer Of The Year
GIMH said:
Haddin showing he's all class giving Root grief for daring to think he wasn't out
Click to expand...
Said it before and I'll say it again, Haddin is the biggest **** in this Aussie side. Had a brilliant series but he's still a ****.
 
GIMH

GIMH

Norwood's on Fire
Spark said:
Really, it's just an extension of how umpiring has worked for 150 years, isn't it? If there's a noise as ball passes bat then it's out
Click to expand...
Yeah, though it sucks for a batsman who hits their bat against their shoelaces
 
Riggins

Riggins

International Captain
GIMH said:
I kind of agree - but it's got to a point with edge reviews that I think you've got to see daylight between bat and ball for them to see it as 'conclusive'.

I know we gotta favour the umpire's decision if there is nothing definitive but common sense has to prevail. For me it's a case of, when using the tech to review an edge (or alleged edge) that was originally called out, is there any evidence that could point to an out? If the answer is no then that's conclusive enough for me.
Click to expand...
Yeah I agree. I don't really have a problem with it being not out, because I think he probably didn't hit it. It's just that's not the rule. And it will frustrate me to no end when common sense is applied here and then the same thing will happen 20 minutes later and they go by the letter of the law.
 
Son Of Coco

Son Of Coco

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
GIMH said:
Look I know he's struggled in these series but can I just say

Joe Root>Steve Smith

Better batsman, better bowler, better looking.

Thanks
Click to expand...
Roots cricinfo profile picture suggests you're wrong



He was on holiday in Tenerife in this shot.
 
Last edited:
GIMH

GIMH

Norwood's on Fire
Riggins said:
Yeah I agree. I don't really have a problem with it being not out, because I think he probably didn't hit it. It's just that's not the rule. And it will frustrate me to no end when common sense is applied here and then the same thing will happen 20 minutes later and they go by the letter of the law.
Click to expand...
I feel like for catches there should be no sort of 'umpires call' bias and basically it should just be about whether there's enough evidence to give the batsman out. As Spark said, like how cricket has always been.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top