***Official*** Australia in South Africa + South Africa in Australia 2016/17

[morgieb]

2 in a row now......this could get interesting if Smith goes cheaply too.

 

[stephen]

Unlucky there on that review. So close to umpires call

 

[StephenZA]

Unlucky there on that review. So close to umpires call

So if only the ball was not hitting the stumps in other words....

 

[TheJediBrah]

Umpires call still has way too big a margin

a ball smashing the stumps should never be umpires call. Surely there's not that much error in the system.

 

[social]

Close in shot must not be squarely aligned as that definitely looked to be going down leg from where he was struck

 

[StephenZA]

Shamsi been really poor this game.... potential but lots of work to do on his consistency for good test match lengths. To much LO cricket.

 

[morgieb]

Surely outside the line?

 

[Gnske]

Just when you thought reviews couldn't get more ****

 

[SteveNZ]

Gee, don't think he really played a shot at that. But can't possibly rule he didn't.

 

[StephenZA]

Way outside the line.... terrible review, Philandering at its best.

 

[Gnske]

That """"technique""""

 

[SteveNZ]

Way outside the line.... terrible review, Philandering at its best.

It wasn't a terrible review at all. 40-odd to get, and there's a significant amount of evidence to say he didn't play a shot at that. But absolutely fair that it wasn't seen as such.

 

[91Jmay]

He didn't play a shot there but never going to overrule on field up so bad review

 

[StephenZA]

It wasn't a terrible review at all. 40-odd to get, and there's a significant amount of evidence to say he didn't play a shot at that. But absolutely fair that it wasn't seen as such.

Once the umpire decided a shot was played, outside the line that far was always poor decision. Not going to change the umps mind. If Smith snick's it next 2 overs and given not out we will regret that.... Philander forced that review.

 

[Gnske]

Nice subtle jab there by Clarke.

 

[SteveNZ]

But I doubt Faf could ask Kettleborough if he'd played a shot before reviewing. Maybe he could've, actually. Anyway 40 runs to get, you've got one up your sleeve, heat of the moment, it's not a bad review. It's been turned down but its not a 'bad' review. Same as a declaration is not 'bad' solely on the basis of the other side winning.

 

[StephenZA]

Maybe Renshaw has some sort of superpower not to nick the ball.... great for an opening bat.

 

[SteveNZ]

Once the umpire decided a shot was played, outside the line that far was always poor decision. Not going to change the umps mind. If Smith snick's it next 2 overs and given not out we will regret that.... Philander forced that review.

Big if. Faf wouldn't have known Kettleborough said he'd played a shot. If he did then yeah, poor review but given he asked the umpire after the third umpire said not out, then we can conclude he didn't know. Can't save a review with 40 runs to go just because Steve Smith may not only nick one, but also the umpires don't do their job and give it out.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Renshaw needs to learn to sweep IMO

would make his game against spin a great deal better, maybe even make him viable for the tour to India

 

[91Jmay]

Big if. Faf wouldn't have known Kettleborough said he'd played a shot. If he did then yeah, poor review but given he asked the umpire after the third umpire said not out, then we can conclude he didn't know. Can't save a review with 40 runs to go just because Steve Smith may not only nick one, but also the umpires don't do their job and give it out.

You can ask umpire if he thought he was playing a shot, England had a similar situation in a match recently.