-
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 New Zealand in India Nov-Dec 2021 Thread***
- Thread starter nzfan
- Start date
straw man
Hall of Fame Member
hilarious replay - literally clean bowled and review
Fuller Pilch
Hall of Fame Member
Ajaz:
13 wickets in 3 tests in the UAE
9 wickets in 1 and a bit tests in India
9 wickets in 2 tests in Sri Lanka
4 wickets in 1 test in England
0 wickets in 3 tests in NZ
Away and neutral track bully
13 wickets in 3 tests in the UAE
9 wickets in 1 and a bit tests in India
9 wickets in 2 tests in Sri Lanka
4 wickets in 1 test in England
0 wickets in 3 tests in NZ
Away and neutral track bully
Last edited:
hendrix
Hall of Fame Member
Cricinfo doesn't have them losing a review.
I'm not sure why.
Batsmen don't always know when they've hit it, they don't know when they're plumb LBW, why should they also get a pass when they're clean bowled?
OverratedSanity
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Yeah I just noticed we lost a review for the Kohli one. That's so dumb. How do officials overlook such obvious gaps in the rules, its literally umpire's call just not on ball tracking so you lose a review?
hendrix
Hall of Fame Member
Yeah any call where the verdict is clearly "not enough evidence to overturn" then you should retain your review.
OverratedSanity
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Batting seems way harder for the right handers. Not quite the same sharp rip from over the wicket against the lefties for ajaz, even though it is turning. I'm usually not one for the left-right combination thing but India need to get one left handed batsman into the top/middle order atleast especially when so many of them are underperforming. It's part of why Pant has been a huge asset vs opposition spinners.
honestbharani
Whatever it takes!!!
India did not lose a review for the Ashwin one. He thought he was given out caught behind and reviewed it and then the umpire said he was bowled, he looked back and gave a thumbs up and walked off. But the umpire, for some reason, then reviewed the bowled.
We have spoken enough about the Kohli decision but to answer @Bahnz s question, I think it was a bad decision because it seems the umpire totally missed the fact that the ball hit the bat. When bat and pad are that close to each other, most umpires will give it not out and let the fielding team review if they think it was pad first. I just dont see how an umpire can miss that obvious a deflection and on replays, to me, it was clear it was inside edge on to back pad and nothing else. Of course, as I said earlier, the third umpire could not do anything else if he felt the replays were inconclusive and with the foreshortening effect, that was fair enough. And again, just because it was a bad or a rough decision does not mean the onfield call was some shocker either. Just bad luck for a player in bad form, that's all.
We have spoken enough about the Kohli decision but to answer @Bahnz s question, I think it was a bad decision because it seems the umpire totally missed the fact that the ball hit the bat. When bat and pad are that close to each other, most umpires will give it not out and let the fielding team review if they think it was pad first. I just dont see how an umpire can miss that obvious a deflection and on replays, to me, it was clear it was inside edge on to back pad and nothing else. Of course, as I said earlier, the third umpire could not do anything else if he felt the replays were inconclusive and with the foreshortening effect, that was fair enough. And again, just because it was a bad or a rough decision does not mean the onfield call was some shocker either. Just bad luck for a player in bad form, that's all.
RossTaylorsBox
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
What would happen if that Ashwin dismissal was a no-ball
honestbharani
Whatever it takes!!!
Wont matter. The 3rd umpire checks the no ball every ball. You would have heard that God forsaken siren go off. That is all. You dont have to review to check the no-ball if you are dismissed. Its checked automatically every ball anyways.
hendrix
Hall of Fame Member
The umpire reviewed the bowled because Ashwin reviewed it. He signalled for a review. He should lose a review.
Or if the keeper's gloves had knocked off the bail before the ball arrives? (a la Brad Haddin cheating incident in pre-DRS days). I don't see why a player can't ask for a review for a bowled.
Hold on, how do you know he missed the fact it hit the bat? He could have decided it was pad first squeezed into bat. The fact we're still debating it a day on and there's people on the 'he hit it first' side (generally Indians, I get that) and some who are pad first, means it's not a bad decision at all. I understand how you're seeing it your way, and I agree - bad luck. But you have to appreciate it's not 'clear' it was inside edge and nothing else, because there's mixed views.
For those who want the review retained, that would be based on umpire interpretation - it was borderline so keep the review. Whereas ball tracker uses actual data that says it struck the batsman in umpire's call zones, so reviews are kept. That's another slippery slope if the third umpire can then use his jurisdiction to say oh that was close, keep your review on bat-pad squeezes etc.
On reviews, I feel like we've gone from an era where batsmen used reviews way too often (Gayle, Watson etc) to a time where that's actually how they should be using them now. If it's plumb, OK leave it alone. But if it's borderline, like the Young one last week and even Saha should've reviewed before - it was touch and go, and you're probably going to retain your review...and if you don't, you still have one left.
honestbharani
Whatever it takes!!!
Lol.. the 3rd umpire literally said it was not a player review but an umpire review. And if you actually watched it fully, he showed the review sign, then umpire said he was bowled, he looked back, gave a thumbs up and walked off.