• 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*** India in Australia 2014-5

viriya

viriya

International Captain
Would've been nice to have DRS but Aussies shouldn't feel that hard done by considering Dhawan wasn't out.. Vijay's lbw just evens things out..

It's 33% Aus/Ind/Draw atm it seems..
 
A

Antihippy

International Debutant
Cevno said:
Tbf that was Umpire's call in DRS also but umpires will give limited Benefit of doubt to such padding up.

Good that Erasmus is a not outer but still.
Click to expand...
That was hitting halfway below leg bail.

Doesn't matter though, he wasn't going to give something that is hitting middle stump from someone padding up. You can't even try to snare an edge because they don't even have to pretend to use the bat.

No drs means that umpires don't have that safety net to try to read the spin, thus allowing batsmen more leeway to pad up. Such a terrible thing for spinners.
 
Last edited:
Red

Red

The normal awards that everyone else has
Well today I've realised I'm a big advocate of DRS.

Especially when we have better bowlers.
 
Cabinet96

Cabinet96

Hall of Fame Member
The argument that a batsman should be triggered if they chose to not play a shot is definitely one of those accepted cricketing things that is awful and needs to go away.
 
morgieb

morgieb

Request Your Custom Title Now!
viriya said:
Would've been nice to have DRS but Aussies shouldn't feel that hard done by considering Dhawan wasn't out.. Vijay's lbw just evens things out..

It's 33% Aus/Ind/Draw atm it seems..
Click to expand...
Reckon there's a chance dhawan's may not have been overturned.
 
Spark

Spark

Global Moderator
Cabinet96 said:
The argument that a batsman should be triggered if they chose to not play a shot is definitely one of those accepted cricketing things that is awful and needs to go away.
Click to expand...
Why? It encourages a terrible style of play if batsmen feel that they can pad up and rely on not-outer umpires. The game retains its interest as a contest between bat and ball, not between ball and pad.
 
OverratedSanity

OverratedSanity

Request Your Custom Title Now!
morgieb said:
I'm finding it hard to see us getting them out soon. Only question is can certain batsmen be aggressive enough?
Click to expand...
It's the 4th innings. Invariably all it takes is one wicket for a bunch to go down. We shouldn't be thinking of a win right now. Maybe if its 70 to get with 16-17 overs to go with 7 wickets in hand, we could get it down to 16 off 18 with 3 wickets left and then block out 17 balls and Mohammad Shami could bop Mitch over long on for 16 for the win.
 
Cevno

Cevno

Hall of Fame Member
Antihippy said:
That was hitting halfway below leg bail.

Doesn't matter though, he wasn't going to give something that is hitting middle stump from someone padding up. You can't even try to snare an edge because they don't even have to pretend to use the bat.

No drs means that umpires don't have that safety net to try to read the spin, thus allowing batsmen more leeway to pad up. Such a terrible thing for spinners.
Click to expand...

I don't think Erasmus would have given this one DRS or no DRS. He seems more a not outer and did the same when India was bowling. With a different umpire you don't know which is why padding up like that isn't good when not required.

Btw, The first appeal was the howler earlier but not really this one even if looked out.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top