**Official**VB Series 2005 Australia,Pakistan,West Indies.

[6-28]

it just had to be out. I'm sick of reputations influencing decisions. Do you think that would have not been given if it was Lee bowling to Butt or Umar. This is simply wrong and I'm afraid that their is a large trend of bias emerging in umpiring towards Australia. This is coming from an Australian.

 

[Eclipse]

it just had to be out. I'm sick of reputations influencing decisions. Do you think that would have not been given if it was Lee bowling to Butt or Umar. This is simply wrong and I'm afraid that their is a large trend of bias emerging in umpiring towards Australia. This is coming from an Australian.

well a better appeal would have helped..

 

[6-28]

Yeah agreed, it was a poor appeal then Rana looked shocked when given not out. It was poor cricket on their behalf and indicates that their spirit was broken in Melbourne.

 

[Duncan]

Umpires should base their decisions on what they see, not the appeals.

 

[Unattainableguy]

Why is Inzamam still continuing with Rana when he's been hit for 33 runs in 3 overs?

 

[Duncan]

Why is Inzamam still continuing with Rana when he's been hit for 33 runs in 3 overs?

42 off 4 actually.

 

[Unattainableguy]

Umpires should base their decisions on what they see, not the appeals.

Still a better appeal would convince them into giving out

 

[Duncan]

Razzaq is on now. And yes, I agree.

 

[Duncan]

Gilly gone. Finally.

 

[Zinzan]

I can't believe that LBW shout wasn't given. I wholeheartedly agree with Lawry and Richie. That was plum, absolutely plum.

Rudi what are you doing?

Maybe since Gilchrist is such a dangerous batsmen and such a key wicket that umpires don't want to make the big decision of giving him out LBW early on. I don't think they are biased or anything like that but he has been plumb around 4 times this season early on and not given.

I'm not suggesting that Gilchrist is the only batsmen in the world to benefit from a poor decision. But he seem to benefit more than most. I thought Vettori's 2 were bad enough, but that Rana decision I thought was out immediately. Number 10 or 11 batsmen would have been shot out immediately by these appeals.

The sooner technology is used for LBW's the better.

 

[chaminda_00]

I don't think u can blame the umpire for the LBW, anyone whose umpired knows that the hardest LBWs to give are the ones pitching on or outside leg stump. But that is probrably why they should be refers these to 3rd umpires, espically when their that close. Gilly out anyway, good over by Razzaq

 

[Crazy Sam]

i'd hate to be an umpire at the highest level....having to look down for a potential no-ball as they enter the crease, then look up at where the ball pitches, then look to see where it hits the pad and what direction (or even whether it hits bat, ball or body)....all within 1-2 seconds of each other as well. It was plumb on the replays but the umpires don't have those luxuries.

 

[Duncan]

Third umpires should give the LBW decisions if they think it is close. But then again, the umpires will still manage to screw it up by not referring to them. So I don't know if it can be fixed.

 

[Duncan]

Good bowling since Rana is out of the attack. RR is down to 4.9.

 

[chaminda_00]

i'd hate to be an umpire at the highest level....having to look down for a potential no-ball as they enter the crease, then look up at where the ball pitches, then look to see where it hits the pad and what direction (or even whether it hits bat, ball or body)....all within 1-2 seconds of each other as well. It was plumb on the replays but the umpires don't have those luxuries.

That why 3rd umpire should also do no-ball, if the ground umpires have more time to look at action zone they will proabably be more consistent with LBWs. I think they will get allot more decisions right, if this was the case.

 

[Scallywag]

i'd hate to be an umpire at the highest level....having to look down for a potential no-ball as they enter the crease, then look up at where the ball pitches, then look to see where it hits the pad and what direction (or even whether it hits bat, ball or body)....all within 1-2 seconds of each other as well. It was plumb on the replays but the umpires don't have those luxuries.

The biggest problem was the umpire had the stumps obscured by the batsman and Rana should have come around the wicket if he is going to go for the LBWs.

Most left handed bowlers will attest to the fact it is much harder to get a LBW when you bowl on the leg side.

 

[Arrow]

So another plum denied for the pakistanis? Thats really pathetic.

Interesting to see clarkes SR struggling again compared to when he was just a fill in batsman. Seems like the pressure of responsability is taking its toll.

 

[chaminda_00]

The biggest problem was the umpire had the stumps obscured by the batsman and Rana should have come around the wicket if he is going to go for the LBWs.

Mate if they don't know where the stumps, even with the batsmen in front of it they shouldn't be umpiring internationals. U don't need to come around the wicket if u are swinging it back in to left hand batsmen.

 

[Arrow]

Third umpires should give the LBW decisions if they think it is close. But then again, the umpires will still manage to screw it up by not referring to them. So I don't know if it can be fixed.

Ive always beleived it ludicrous how the umpires have to look down for the no ball and then be expected to change view and focus within a few seconds.
LBWs are probably the hardest element of umpiring/ refereeing in any sport i can think of.

 

[Dydl]

Finally Ponting gets off the mark.


I am keeping track of what Australia are on after every over and will then compare it to what Pakistan is after the same amount of overs. It should be quite interesting as 9 doesn't show it all that often.