***Official*** VB Series 2006

[luckyeddie]

U must be joking, if you know the rules you clearly wont be making mis-guided claims such as this!

There has been no change with respect to when the third umpire may be called in order to adjudicate on a catch - it requires both umpires to be unsighted - note, not just one, and then it can be referred.

Note that even in the laughably named 'Super Series', the extension of the use of technology was restricted to the on-field umpires being able to ask for guidance regarding whether or not a ball had pitched outside leg stump in the case of lbw appeals.

Don't you think that THEN would have been the time to introduce new rules regarding the referral of catches?

As far as what constitutes a clean catch, if it bounces it's not out. What rules do you play - one-handed off the school bike sheds is good?

 

[Top_Cat]

Hondo; ask yourself honestly, if you hit a ball towards a fielder and were pretty damn sure that the fielder didn't take it cleanly, yet they went up, would you walk? I'm betting not. Why? It would be stupid. If you walk when you're sure you're not out, that's make you stupid. It's not even a sportsmanship issue, either; if Ponting had've walked, that would have been effectively gifting SL a wicket and he would have been rightly pillored worldwide for being so damn stupid.

Don't why Murali was going nuts for that; it didn't straighten enough and was far from plumb.

 

[Top_Cat]

I suggest that you take a look at it bit more closely, cause it's clearly was caught!

Seriously, are you making any attempt to be objective on this? There was NO 'definite' about it and in fact looked decidedly dubious.

 

[parttimer]

I had to type this out bcos ICC rules is in PDF format :/
Rule 3.2 3.1
b) Should both umpires be unable to make a decision, a notout decision shall be given by the bowlers end umpire. Only if the line of vision of both umpires is obscured shall the bowlers end umpire be entitled to refer the decision to the 3rd umpire.

 

[PANIC!]

I suggest that you take a look at it bit more closely, cause it's clearly was caught!

And people say Australians are bias

Gilly on fire, Australia looking very good.

 

[age_master]

yep Gilly looking very good

 

[Blaze]

Don't why Murali was going nuts for that; it didn't straighten enough and was far from plumb.

It was a 50/50 call IMO..

 

[luckyeddie]

Laws Eddie...

Mock bluster and cries of 'Another Pimms, Bunty' all round......

The laws of the game are to do with ALL cricket, from test matches right down to grass roots level.

I don't think that they say anything about television at all, let alone the use of technology in order to settle disputes. These are 'local rules' and are issued by the ICC.

ICC Rules

Laws of the Game

 

[age_master]

I suggest that you take a look at it bit more closely, cause it's clearly was caught!

i think you must have missed the frame where it hits the ground...

 

[Top_Cat]

It was a 50/50 call IMO..

Certainly. Not plumb, though. Hey man, I would have gone up!

 

[Jono]

100 off 67 balls by Gilly. Breaks the record he made against the World XI for fastest ton in Australia. What a freak.

 

[PANIC!]

100 off 67 balls, magic stuff from Gilly.

 

[Top_Cat]

Geez Gilly's going nuts! Well-played in a pressure situation and aside from the dropped-catch, possibly better than his ton earlier in the summer. The last six was SWEETLY hit......

I get the feeling Gilly is probably mostly pleased because his form wobbles are over. He's been a bit out of sorts for almost a year, really.

 

[dontcloseyoureyes]

He's looking alright....

 

[dontcloseyoureyes]

Go Katich

 

[age_master]

Katich 50 solid but far too many dot balls in it for the role hes supposed to have been playing (he had 39 dot balls at the same point as Gilly haveing his 50 off 39 balls)

 

[Jdz]

Guess I'll have to watch his innings when it comes on television in Perth! argh, I hate this delayed telecast bs.

 

[PANIC!]

Go Katich

Thank god for Gilchrist.

 

[Hondo]

There has been no change with respect to when the third umpire may be called in order to adjudicate on a catch - it requires both umpires to be unsighted - note, not just one, and then it can be referred.

Note that even in the laughably named 'Super Series', the extension of the use of technology was restricted to the on-field umpires being able to ask for guidance regarding whether or not a ball had pitched outside leg stump in the case of lbw appeals.

Don't you think that THEN would have been the time to introduce new rules regarding the referral of catches?

As far as what constitutes a clean catch, if it bounces it's not out. What rules do you play - one-handed off the school bike sheds is good?

What you are saying is all good if the ball actually bounced. yiou can't be that blind to see actually what happaned! Go take another look.

 

[Arrow]

Crapich's stike rate is 20 years out of date. **** him off seriously.