***Official*** India in West Indies

[silentstriker]

No, it is not.

A catch on the boundary there is the simple case of the fielder's word for taking the ball.

The edge has to be judged by the umpire.

So the umpire doesn't judge whether he took the ball on the boundry? What if the umpire clearly saw the fielder stepping out?

Or, what if, in the slips, the player sees the batsman miss and goes up anyway? Is he acting in an unsportsmanlike manner? Or what if he didn't see it at all, he just goes up cause he sees the bowler going up? Is that within the 'spirit of the game'?

Now, I agree that in that case you have to take the fielders word. But its not different from the other things

 

[viktor]

Since when is a fielder's word on catching the ball the same as the fielder's word on an edge?

Not same, similar.
In both cases its just that, the fielder's word. In their enthusiasm to win, in both cases, the fielder might claim something which he isn't sure to be true. If it is okay for a batsman not to take a keeper's word on a caught behind, why should he be expected to take an outfielder's word?
In this case it wasn't the fielder's word on the catch but on his position when he took it. Considering how close to the rope he was and that his back was to the rope, he might not have been sure.

 

[viktor]

I'm confused.

I understand. Murali can do that to you.

 

[nightprowler10]

So the umpire doesn't judge whether he took the ball on the boundry? What if the umpire clearly saw the fielder stepping out?

Or, what if, in the slips, the player sees the batsman miss and goes up anyway? Is he acting in an unsportsmanlike manner? Or what if he didn't see it at all, he just goes up cause he sees the bowler going up? Is that within the 'spirit of the game'?

Now, I agree that in that case you have to take the fielders word. But its not different from the other things

Yes it is different. Because if there is a nick:

1. The batsman knows if there was a nick or not
2. The view is not hidden from the umpire

In the Dhoni drama, the only one who apparently could tell if the catch was good or not was the fielder. Unlike the above scenario:

1. The view was hidden from the umpire
2. The view was hidden from the batsman
3. The proper view was apparently hidden from the 3rd umpire

In this situation, you can do one of the two things; either call the fielder, a professional cricketer, a liar, or take his word for it. The latter makes more sense, because even though he may really be lying, you have no choice but to hope that he is being a good sportsman.

 

[aussie]

bastmen around the world will miss the ARG thats for sure..

 

[silentstriker]

Cricinfo's audio commentary:

http://usa.cricinfo.com/db/PRODUCTS/audio/Antigua-Day-4.mp3

 

[adharcric]

I agree that he should be fined but my argument stil holds. I'm quite sure he could have done it more respectfully though but it's the idea of what he was trying to uphold i'm supporting.

Yes, the captain should always stand up for his team. Lara did much more than that - he argued with the umpires after a decision had been taken, he snatched the ball away from Asad Rauf, he ignored the umpire's authority and proceeded to take matters into his own hands by directly giving Dhoni a lecture on why he should declare his innings. In fact, Lara should thank Dravid for declaring the innings before Lara did anything further to earn himself a massive fine. Nevertheless, if he isn't fined, either Billy Doctrove and co. are ridiculously biased or just plain bad umpires.

 

[adharcric]

Here's Cricinfo's report on today's controversy.

http://content-usa.cricinfo.com/wivind/content/current/story/249668.html

After reading that, it becomes rather clear that
a) Dhoni should have been not out (by benefit of doubt)
b) Ganga wasn't sure whether he had stepped on the line
c) Lara was the only one who exhibited unsportsmanlike conduct

 

[Dasa]

Here's Cricinfo's report on today's controversy.

http://content-usa.cricinfo.com/wivind/content/current/story/249668.html

After reading that, it becomes rather clear that
a) Dhoni should have been not out (by benefit of doubt)
b) Ganga wasn't sure whether he had stepped on the line
c) Lara was the only one who exhibited unsportsmanlike conduct

Exactly. I can't see how some people can turn this around and accuse Dhoni or the Indian team of unsportsmanlike conduct or of not respecting the spirit of the game. At any rate, it's very disappointing to see Lara act the way he did. I have definitely lost some respect for him....

 

[Sanz]

He was just doing all he could to help his team and I guess it did because Dravid couldn't be bothered anymore and declared.

********. Had Dravid not conceded, the drama would have gone forever. I have not seen such blatant bias in a while.

 

[Sanz]

No, it is not.

A catch on the boundary there is the simple case of the fielder's word for taking the ball.

The edge has to be judged by the umpire.

Marc, Please dont show your Bias here. What part of "'I'm not really sure if I stepped on it'." suggests that fielder's word should be trusted here ?

 

[Sanz]

In this situation, you can do one of the two things; either call the fielder, a professional cricketer, a liar, or take his word for it. The latter makes more sense, because even though he may really be lying, you have no choice but to hope that he is being a good sportsman.

"'I'm not really sure if I stepped on it'." - Daren Ganga. Do you still think Dhoni should have walked ?

 

[Sanz]

Here's Cricinfo's report on today's controversy.

http://content-usa.cricinfo.com/wivind/content/current/story/249668.html

After reading that, it becomes rather clear that
a) Dhoni should have been not out (by benefit of doubt)
b) Ganga wasn't sure whether he had stepped on the line
c) Lara was the only one who exhibited unsportsmanlike conduct

It was clear then, it is clear now. But some people are so blinded by their India Bias and the Big BAD Monster India Cricket that everytime something like this happens, they are quick to show their true colors. Oh yeah Big Bad Indian players were so bullish towards the umpires..Oh wait..it was the West Indian Captain and not the Indian player who bullied the Umpires.

 

[biased indian]

Look, here's the thing. The first and most important thing is the third umpire. He had a look, and it was inconclusive. Even though the benefit of the doubt goes to the batsman, in this case you have to take the fielder's word for it. If he says he got it, then you have to take that at face value and follow it.

But usally third umpires dont give back the decision making to the ON field umpires,,,

the appel was made in the first place because the fielder thinks he made the catch,,,,

then what is the need to consult with the third umpire u can take the word of the fielder at that time and walk off,,,,

and in this case ganga himself is quoted as saying that "i am not entierly sure that wether i took it cleanly or not"

 

[biased indian]

Has to be out, surely?! If Ganga says he caught it and you can't prove otherwise, then it's out.

hmmm remember a lot of games where inconclusive video evidence have given the benifit of the doubt to the batsmen,,,,

why no one said that the fielders word should be taken !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[biased indian]

India declare, slightly sportingly vs Dhoni's neglection of spirit of the game.

Agree, me and Neil were just discussing it. Now they have to decide the result of the delivery. In the game's interest it has to be out, rather than six.

so this was the first time it was happening in the history of the game

hope u would have a big report about this on the main page

 

[biased indian]

If there is no evidence to the contrary then what can you do? Assume he must be lying?

Give the benifit of the doubt to the Batsman

 

[biased indian]

It's interesting to note here that just about every single neutral who has expressed an opinion has sided with the fielder.

I wonder why that is?

May be LE Because England Lost to SL hi hi hi hi

Most of the neutral was from ENG

 

[Dasa]

Why are people are so quick to jump on the Indian team for any perceived wrongdoing?
Will any of you who were immediately blaming the situation on Dhoni be admitting you were wrong?

 

[biased indian]

No, it is not.

A catch on the boundary there is the simple case of the fielder's word for taking the ball.

The edge has to be judged by the umpire.

What about a catch in the gully with out a conclusive video evidence

we have seen a lot of them like that given not out !!!!!!!!!!!!!