Bowling side.
Yeah, that's definitely a big issue. Don't really know what can be done about that apart from maybe have an umpire just not give anything in such moments to let all events pan out.
I know that. Shouldn't be though, IMO.
Bowling side might not bother trying to field because the umpire has gone up, and otherwise might not go for four
Yeah. If you look at today's situation, Anderson would've been run out had Taylor not been given out; the decision didn't change what Anderson and Maxwell were doing at all. If Anderson was given a reprieve it'd only be because the standing umpire made a bad call originally, and no other reason.. which, while technically correct, would have felt like a worse outcome to me.
Yeah it's obviously a bit of a no win situation. Replaying the delivery seems a bit extreme, but maybe a selective replay like they sometimes do in tennis (?) in situations where the play was clearly effected by the reaction to the decision.
I agree with this mostly, but Anderson didn't even really fully reach for his ground. I wouldn't be surprised if he had heard the reaction of the bowler or someone and only gave 90% running. Who knows though.
Yeah but what if you changed the rule and someone stopped running because the umpire's finger had gone up?
Exactly. Impossible to definitively say he'd have done nothing differently
If the rules were changed and a player did that, he'd be doing something careless by not considering that it might be reviewed. Obviously this isn't the case now because of how the rules actually are, but the players would be expected to take them into account once they were set.
It would be stupid to have players complete runs just in case, no? I actually think this is one of your more stupid ideas. Sorry mate.
Agree with this; players will adapt to it quickly if they're told these playing conditions beforehand. It's clearly a flaw at present but if I were officiating in such a condition I think I'd let the ball play through before making my LBW decision.
How's that different to making sure you cross when you sky one to deep midwicket so the new batsman isn't facing, or the dozen or more times you back up a throw that the keeper easily gathers at the stumps? Or backing up as a non-striker? Or anticipating a shot?
They are all before the event. Going full pelt on a run after you or your partner is already out just seems stupid to me. I dunno. Maybe I'm being overly officious. I think it would be a stupid rule.
I think that's much less stupid than this situation:
Or another theoretical situation where the non-striker isn't even aware the striker has been given out lbw, runs through, gets run out and then gets a random reprieve because the standing umpire made a bad call originally.
