• 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* Fourth Test at Chester-le-Street

GIMH

GIMH

Norwood's on Fire
hazsa19 said:
Surely the idea is to make the correct call. If he's given out caught behind, but it's actually plumb lbw then that decision should be made.
Click to expand...
Yeah I wouldn't go as far as saying that England should have to review it but I'd say no review should be lost in such circumstances
 
NUFAN

NUFAN

Y no Afghanistan flag
4/4 in NRL Tipping so far, yessss.

2 close games in the AFL, looking forward to tuning into the big game at lunch, might flick over the Swans game too.

I'm really liking having Rogers at the top of the order. I know he hasn't made a ton, but he looks like he knows his game inside out, whereas the younger kids don't always.
 
Ruckus

Ruckus

International Captain
GIMH said:
Yeah I wouldn't go as far as saying that England should have to review it but I'd say no review should be lost in such circumstances
Click to expand...
I'm pretty sure if Rogers was lbw, we would have lost a review though. I'm not even sure it has precedent tbh, surely it must though.
 
GIMH

GIMH

Norwood's on Fire
Ruckus said:
I'm pretty sure if Rogers was lbw, we would have lost a review though. I'm not even sure it has precedent tbh, surely it must though.
Click to expand...
Yeah you would but I'm saying you shouldn't

Same as I think umpires call decisions shouldn't be a lost review
 
benchmark00

benchmark00

Request Your Custom Title Now!
BoyBrumby said:
Yeah, that's fair enough; hence Rogers being NO.

He should've still been gone with three reds tho, surely? The original decision would've been wrong doubly so. Given out for caught behind wrongly; overturned. Give not out for LBW wrongly; also overturned.
Click to expand...
The problem is that they shouldn't have checked for the LBW, but agree once they did check it he would have had to go.

The system is created in a way that there is a risk associated with going for a review. If consistency is going to prevail, in that circumstance it should be England who have to call for the review and risk losing one.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top