Umpiring Errors

[Spark]

One to India. That was plumb.

.

 

[Top_Cat]

No, you misunderstood me. I meant 'why hasn't anyone posted about that LBW appeal in font size 36 because I'm clearly blind?'

 

[Spikey]

nah it was marginal

 

[GIMH]

Trott didn't walk; unless you're a mind reader there's no way to be sure if he was lbw, regardless of what replays conclusively prove

 

[BoyBrumby]

Two for Davis today, both happily rectified by UDRS. Kumar's nick was a faint one, so no real criticism there, but he should've seen Sehwag's glove. Looked a pretty fair deviation after contact.

It at least shows a bowdlerised review system is better than none at all.

 

[vic_orthdox]

I can understand the Sehwag one in terms of him thinking that it might have been forearm, shirt or body. Still, right decision in the end.

 

[Burgey]

And tbf, so early on, he was still getting his eye in.

 

[GIMH]

I think it's decisions like those that make me question when people say UDRS is for 'howlers' and at the same time demonstrate why the game would be poorer without it. I wouldn't come down hard on him for either decision if we had no UDRS but both were clearly out on first replay. I don't really see any downside to these sorts of decisions going upstairs.

 

[Stapel]

I think it's decisions like those that make me question when people say UDRS is for 'howlers' and at the same time demonstrate why the game would be poorer without it. I wouldn't come down hard on him for either decision if we had no UDRS but both were clearly out on first replay. I don't really see any downside to these sorts of decisions going upstairs.

As said before by many others. To cut out the howlers, we hardly need snicko, hotspot or hawkeye. Just a common TV-replay will do most of the time!

Anyway, I'm all for UDRS and even wouldn't mind sending ANY decision upstairs.

 

[smash84]

As said before by many others. To cut out the howlers, we hardly need snicko, hotspot or hawkeye. Just a common TV-replay will do most of the time!

Anyway, I'm all for UDRS and even wouldn't mind sending ANY decision upstairs.

This

 

[BoyBrumby]

Reckon Strauss being bowled off a no-ball counts in the debit column.

Come on, we all know this one, join in on the chorus, "Why doesn't the third ump make all front foot no-ball calls? It's so bleedin' obvious..."

 

[keeper]

Re the Pietersen catch behind that was given not-out by snicko. Did Sky show the hawkeye of it as an LBW? Looked very close.

 

[MW1304]

Possibly outside the line. I don't think they showed Hawkeye, though, so nothing conclusive.

 

[Themer]

Was outside the line, iirc, although they didn't show Hawkeye.

 

[keeper]

Ok ta both. Shouldn't be surprised given how much KP was walking over to off so often.

 

[Jacknife]

The one where they thought they had him caught behind , on the hawkeye the ball was missing by about a foot over the top. Warne was on the comms at the time and he said ohh that's close for Lbw and Hussein said yes only missing by about a meter, or something like that.

 

[GIMH]

Gambhir b Swann lbw, not given, **** you BCCI

 

[BlazeDragon]

Gambhir b Swann lbw, not given, **** you BCCI

Damn you were quick.

 

[zaremba]

yep, plumb.

 

[grecian]

Oh it was plumb and Davis is having an uncommonly poor match. The pressure on the umps not having udrs showing? because we've generally seen the better umpires doing okay here, but the poorer one's crumbling in a heap.

"Come on, we all know this one, join in on the chorus, "Why doesn't the third ump make all front foot no-ball calls? It's so bleedin' obvious..." "

Brumbers right here, but we DO need to reiterate it as much as possible, it's such a simple thing yet it could up umpiring standards massively.