***Official*** England in Pakistan

[luckyeddie]

luckyeddie:

The fault is equally distributed between the three umpires. All of them had enough time to realize that the evasive action clause applied here and yet none of them did anything.

Absolutely spot on. That's 3 umpires ought to be banned then

/just being fair

 

[nightprowler10]

In this day and age, it makes a refreshing change to see a bowler deliver the ball with a straight arm.

I agree. Ever since his VB series performance, I've tried to emulate Rana's action.

 

[supereddi08]

supereddi08:

That's the thing though. A bad decision is a bad decision. Yousuf's was a bad deicision, I accepted that. Inzamam's however was a clear violation of cricketing rules.

Re: Afridi's incident. I didn't watch it, but If it sounds as bad as it does, ban him.


luckyeddie:

The fault is equally distributed between the three umpires. All of them had enough time to realize that the evasive action clause applied here and yet none of them did anything.

Why a violation? Harmison shied, hit the stumps and appealed... now if Inzi was evading and therefore not attempting a run the decision should have been not out, it was the umpire's call, you can't say appealing because you hit the stumps and believe a guy is out is a clear violation, until tonight's drama if I had done that during one of my matches on the weekend I would appeal but that's because I wasn't aware of the rule.

 

[Dasa]

Why a violation? Harmison shied, hit the stumps and appealed... now if Inzi was evading and therefore not attempting a run the decision should have been not out, it was the umpire's call, you can't say appealing because you hit the stumps and believe a guy is out is a clear violation, until tonight's drama if I had done that during one of my matches on the weekend I would appeal but that's because I wasn't aware of the rule.

There was nothing wrong with the appeal, the decision is the point of contention because it simply was not out. International umpires should know the laws of the game inside out, but it seems neither of the three picked up on it.

 

[Top_Cat]

He's a very good cricketer, and I think he receives plenty of praise on these boards, particularly after the VB Series as performing in Aust. is generally what is required for one to be rated by Australians (Watch Bravo and Ramdin elevated now ).

Already happening; some clowns are saying there should be five bowlers in Adelaide to account for the possibility that they might have another big partnership. Sheesh......

However to be fair to the critics of Rana, his declining hair line makes him hard to take seriously.

The guy continuously hits the pitch at 140+km/h; hair or not, if I was at the business-end of one of his deliveries, he'd have MY full attention.

 

[SJS]

Afridi .....might just get fined his match fee.

That would be worse than being farcical. It would be complicity on ICC's part in what was a blatant attempt at ruination of the game and its spirit.

 

[supereddi08]

If I got a delivery like the one he sent down to Vaughan I'd be taking him seriously

 

[Beleg]

Why a violation?

Did you read the article I linked you to? The decision should have been not-out, but it wasn't, which is a violation of the ICC laws regarding run-outs themselves within the context of this decision.

Or are you saying that Inzamam's movement wasn't evasive action?

 

[Top_Cat]

There was nothing wrong with the appeal, the decision is the point of contention because it simply was not out. International umpires should know the laws of the game inside out, but it seems neither of the three picked up on it.

Even if they didn't know the rules, it was certainly dug-up pretty soon after he got out. I'm not too sure but can a batsman be re-instated after they've come off? Sort of like they'd been injured and come back on? If so, the fact that they didn't re-instate him compounds the issue for mine.

 

[luckyeddie]

Did you read the article I linked you to? The decision should have been not-out, but it wasn't, which is a violation of the ICC laws regarding run-outs themselves within the context of this decision.

Or are you saying that Inzamam's movement wasn't evasive action?

So what you are saying now is there is no such thing as a mistake - it's now a 'violation'?

Melodrama IS your middle name.

 

[Jono]

The guy continuously hits the pitch at 140+km/h; hair or not, if I was at the business-end of one of his deliveries, he'd have MY full attention.

Maybe he purposely has that hairstyle to deceive batsman? If so, its working.

 

[supereddi08]

Did you read the article I linked you to? The decision should have been not-out, but it wasn't, which is a violation of the ICC laws regarding run-outs themselves within the context of this decision.

Or are you saying that Inzamam's movement wasn't evasive action?

But a mistake, an honest mistake, is not a violation. It's an error and these happen from time to time although they shouldn't. Lara's dismissals in three of his four innings in Australia have been errors not violations. Afridi's was a violation because it was a deliberate act outside the rules.

It's bad that the umps didn't know the rule because they should at international level but there's nothing sinister going on there. There was something sinister in afridi's actions though. That's my point.

 

[nightprowler10]

Even if they didn't know the rules, it was certainly dug-up pretty soon after he got out. I'm not too sure but can a batsman be re-instated after they've come off? Sort of like they'd been injured and come back on? If so, the fact that they didn't re-instate him compounds the issue for mine.

Actually the commentators picked up on it, not the umpires, AFAIK.

 

[Jono]

Even if they didn't know the rules, it was certainly dug-up pretty soon after he got out. I'm not too sure but can a batsman be re-instated after they've come off? Sort of like they'd been injured and come back on? If so, the fact that they didn't re-instate him compounds the issue for mine.

Symonds was brought back on in the ODI series when Australia toured SL back in 2004. I remember him chopping a ball on his pads, the umpire gave it out and then realised how stupid a mistake he made. He asked Jayasuriya (or whomever was captain, I think it was him) if Symonds could come back and he did. SL won anyway.

They could have done that this time couldn't they?

 

[nightprowler10]

Symonds was brought back on in the ODI series when Australia toured SL back in 2004. I remember him chopping a ball on his pads, the umpire gave it out and then realised how stupid a mistake he made. He asked Jayasuriya (or whomever was captain, I think it was him) if Symonds could come back and he did. SL won anyway.

They could have done that this time couldn't they?

Really? I didn't know that. Very big of the umpire to admit his mistake and very generous of the captain to let him back in.

 

[Beleg]

So what you are saying now is there is no such thing as a mistake - it's now a 'violation'?

Melodrama IS your middle name.

Have you ever taken part in a discussion without retorting to pitiful namecalling?

But taking your own arguement, I am pretty sure what afridi did was also a 'mistake'. I suppose it was a temporary bout of dementia which resulted in him doing a little hop of his own on the pitch - no violation sir, just a simple honest mistake.

I also cannot understand why you are so bent upon defending the umpires (from whichever country) in this case?

 

[Jono]

Really? I didn't know that. Very big of the umpire to admit his mistake and very generous of the captain to let him back in.

Yeah. Literally every player knew he had edged it on the pads, it was that big a mistake. Gilly on the other end couldn't believe it, and complained to the umpire. He and I believe Symonds were later found guilty of dissent for their complaints. Weird match.

 

[luckyeddie]

Really? I didn't know that. Very big of the umpire to admit his mistake and very generous of the captain to let him back in.

Usually it takes a riot.

 

[Pratters]

It will be unfortunate if he is banned, because that was a great effort.

Not really considering he cheated. Also can a part of the penalty/ban fall on Inzamam as he was the captain?

 

[Pratters]

Third umpire's Pakistani. Blame him - he gave it out.

The umpire made an error. What his nationality is does not come into the picture.