Reviews have really confused commentators on this stuff. I was watching the India v South Africa test and the commentators were saying because Faf was given out on the field, them checking the catch had carried meant that the fielder got the benefit of the doubt. The umpire checked to see if it carried, it wasn't a ****ing review, there's no benefit of doubt to the umpire in such a situation.shut up Smith this is not a new phenomenon for claiming catches
They're allowed to I think.Smith's not wrong to wonder why the umpires shouldn't check the replays on their own initiative when in doubt. Would help improve the accuracy in decision making.
was one earlier this series wasnt thereWas one in Sydney earlier this year IIRC.
They're probably confused because usually they do only use it on review by a player. It shows the usefulness of umpires using the technology to assist with their decision making in the first instance. They should be able to do the same with other decisions as I think Smith is suggesting.Reviews have really confused commentators on this stuff. I was watching the India v South Africa test and the commentators were saying because Faf was given out on the field, them checking the catch had carried meant that the fielder got the benefit of the doubt. The umpire checked to see if it carried, it wasn't a ****ing review, there's no benefit of doubt to the umpire in such a situation.
Can they get Dirk Nannes a 9 contract?ABC Radio commentary is freely available if you have a CA account, just saying.
I'd say this is a bit different from the old Johnson. It's more like he's lost a yard of pace and on unhelpful surfaces that makes him a lot less effective given he doesn't have the tricks of some.How come Johnson seems to have reverted to his old self?