• 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 England 2015

Cric123

School Boy/Girl Captain
This Ravi umpire has made some blunders this match.

Anyway, I don't much agree with current ruling. If he gave the batsman not out and England referred Anderson would still be at the wicket, but since he was given out it stays with the umpire. How can you have the same ball have two different implications. The batsman should be given benefit of the doubt if only the outer part of the ball is hitting irrespective of the umpire's on field call or you give him out however narrowly it hits. It's one way or the other. If you aren't 100% confident in the accuracy of Hawkeye then I feel the batsmen should always be given benefit of the doubt if the ball is not hitting more than half ball.
 

Furball

Evil Scotsman
wtf Southee. Now isn't the time to throw the bat loosely.
Nah it makes sense. The cordon's packed so if you can con Cook into taking someone out from in close to put him in the outfield to take a catch then that's not the worst, particularly if you then edge it through the gap you've created.
 

Top