Umpiring Errors

[Jacknife]

Morgan himself > any replay,imo. Btw, the snicko replay showed it could have very possibly hit back of KP'S BAT too,if we are going by that. Remember both decisions need clear and concrete evidence to be overturned and no hotspot mark is not clear evidence.

Whatever mate, just saying what they went through on TV and it all looked pretty clear, from the sound, which sounded like bat on pad, to the snicko replays, clearly showing that noise was after the ball had gone past. Whether it would have got overturned, I doubt without having snicko available.
Haven't got the foggiest what the bolded part is about.

 

[GIMH]

Cevno thinks the ball did a sharp right before going straight on to Dhoni. Don't worry about it.

 

[Furball]

Morgan himself > any replay,imo. Btw, the snicko replay showed it could have very possibly hit back of KP'S BAT too,if we are going by that. Remember both decisions need clear and concrete evidence to be overturned and no hotspot mark is not clear evidence.

Listen mate, you can hero worship Dhoni all you want, and I'll concede he's an excellent batsman and superb leader, but there's simply no way he can bowl deliveries that defy the laws of physics.

 

[Dan]

Cricinfo commentary seems to think that Morgan was under the impression he had been given out LBW, and thus couldn't review it. I didn't see it live, but could that possibly have been the case?

 

[Bun]

Or those who claim to know more about whether Morgan edged it or not than the man himself? And then support it by saying that batsman doesn't know for sure if he has wacked it. Atleast Furball doesn't hide he is supporting England unlike some who pretend to be neutral..............

Seriously comical stuff from guys who're arguing technology (which proved horse**** whether it was out or not) should be considered over the umpire's and victim's words.

And they say you are biased.

 

[Bun]

They've just shown the Morgan dismissal in a little bit more detail, in the highlights package on Sky and it was pretty clear, that he missed it , the snicko registered the noise at the exact time he clipped his pad and hot spot backed it up.

Victim (Morgan) > Jury (Umpire) > Common layman (Jacknife watching highlights on SKY)

 

[Dan]

Seriously comical stuff from guys who're arguing technology (which proved horse**** whether it was out or not) should be considered over the umpire's and victim's words.

And they say you are biased.

Well, given UDRS was brought in to fix umpires' mistakes in the first place, technology should be considered over the umpire. Its kind of the point...

And when did Morgan say he'd hit it, out of curiosity?

 

[Bun]

Cricinfo commentary seems to think that Morgan was under the impression he had been given out LBW, and thus couldn't review it. I didn't see it live, but could that possibly have been the case?

If that's the case, that would only make him more of a douchebag. He's within his rights to enquire his mode of dismissal anyways.

However read somewhere later himself confirmed he thought he hit it..

 

[Bun]

Well, given UDRS was brought in to fix umpires' mistakes in the first place, technology should be considered over the umpire. Its kind of the point...

And when did Morgan say he'd hit it, out of curiosity?

First let's be 100% sure the umpire made a mistake here.

Technology could not prove, repeat, COULD NOT, prove 100% that it was a bad decision.

Anyways, even with best technology available it is upto the player at the receiving end to utilise it. If there is a review system in place, and you've got a right to use it, you've only yourself to blame for not using it.

As dear gingerfurball says, "Should've reviewed it!"

 

[Dan]

If that's the case, that would only make him more of a douchebag. He's within his rights to enquire his mode of dismissal anyways.

However read somewhere later himself confirmed he thought he hit it..

Ok, you've lost me entirely. Is he a douchebag for not reviewing it, or for not knowing how he was out? And you can't exactly walk up to the umpire to ask how you got out anyway, that's just asking for trouble from Indian fans and the media alike.

And until someone provides a source for Morgan saying he hit it, I'm assuming it's been fabricated somewhere along the line. Same would apply for any batsman on either side TBH.

First let's be 100% sure the umpire made a mistake here.

Technology could not prove, repeat, COULD NOT, prove 100% that it was a bad decision.

Anyways, even with best technology available it is upto the player at the receiving end to utilise it. If there is a review system in place, and you've got a right to use it, you've only yourself to blame for not using it.

As dear gingerfurball says, "Should've reviewed it!"

As I said before, I haven't seen it live. You're playing a strawman argument, I never said it was a bad decision, I said that UDRS should be considered as a higher authority than the umpire, as that's the entire reason it was brought in - to override mistakes made by umpires.

Nowhere in my last post did I say the decision was wrong or should have been overturned.

By the sounds of things Morgan should have reviewed it, but for whatever reason, didn't. That could be due to any number of things.

 

[Dan]

Victim (Morgan) > Jury (Umpire) > Common layman (Jacknife watching highlights on SKY)

Ok, you've lost me here. The Batsman is greater than the umpire, who in turn is greater than the viewer? Apart from the dreadful mathematical notation (always use the less than sign in so-called 'sandwich' equations, FTR), you're suggesting the batsman has a better idea of whether he's out or not than the umpire?

EDIT: Generally speaking - not in the case of the Morgan decision, as someone will inevitably interpret it. Pretty hard to judge an LBW from the batting crease IMO.

B******t, we have umpires for a reason - to enforce the laws of the game and tell batsmen whether or not they are out.

And considering the viewer is the one out of the three who have the benefits of hot spot, slow motion, snicko and countless replays readily available, they're in a pretty good position to judge decisions IMO.

EDIT: To clarify the above (since it does read pretty badly), I'm saying that with the benefit of technology the viewer has the best information available to look at the accuracy of a decision after the event has occurred. The field umpire can't watch the ball 6 times over in slow motion.

Once again, I didn't see the decision live and I'm not arguing whether or not Morgan should have been given out. Don't interpret it that way.

 

[Bun]

Facepalm...

 

[Cevno]

Well, given UDRS was brought in to fix umpires' mistakes in the first place, technology should be considered over the umpire. Its kind of the point...

And when did Morgan say he'd hit it, out of curiosity?

It was confirmed from the England dressing room,both by sky and ESPNSTAR that he walked off because he nicked it.END OF.

 

[Bun]

Ok, you've lost me here. The Batsman is greater than the umpire, who in turn is greater than the viewer? Apart from the dreadful mathematical notation (always use the less than sign in so-called 'sandwich' equations, FTR), you're suggesting the batsman has a better idea of whether he's out or not than the umpire?

EDIT: Generally speaking - not in the case of the Morgan decision, as someone will inevitably interpret it. Pretty hard to judge an LBW from the batting crease IMO.

B******t, we have umpires for a reason - to enforce the laws of the game and tell batsmen whether or not they are out.

And considering the viewer is the one out of the three who have the benefits of hot spot, slow motion, snicko and countless replays readily available, they're in a pretty good position to judge decisions IMO.

EDIT: To clarify the above (since it does read pretty badly), I'm saying that with the benefit of technology the viewer has the best information available to look at the accuracy of a decision after the event has occurred. The field umpire can't watch the ball 6 times over in slow motion.

Once again, I didn't see the decision live and I'm not arguing whether or not Morgan should have been given out. Don't interpret it that way.

Thank you for the edits. Mate, I was purely commenting from Morgan decision perspective, don't take it as a commentary on general usage of UDRS.

 

[Howe_zat]

Cevno, I take it you believe KP too, when he says he knew he never edged it?

Or are you still suggesting Dhoni can move the ball at right angles with that one?

 

[Bun]

BTW on topic a plumb lbw (according to Hawkeye, and commentators) of Swann off a Harby delivery was not given.

 

[G.I.Joe]

Morgan's case is an example of why I've been of the view that the players shouldn't be the ones made responsible for asking for the reviews. And this wasn't even an LBW (yes, I'm aware Hawkeye isn't being used here).

 

[hang on]

seem to remember a 'similar' case when the indians last toured blighty. think it was the third test and the young indian opener was given out caught behind. there was obviously no udrs (in those days) or hotspot (in those days? in that series) but there was snicko. which showed no contact. so, people were going on about what a crepe decision it was. but the opener himself (sehwag? no he wasn't playing.....someone please remind me instead of making me head off to cricinfo) later confirmed that he'd got a touch on it. featherlight. could well be what happened with morgan. the bastman generally knows though there are occasions when, in the blur/heat of the moment, they are too discombobulated to take fully rational decisions (or even be totally sure that they actually know). to illustrate the point that the batsman is also often confused, i think that there was series between india and pak in pak in which tendulkar was given out for not much after gloving the ball down the legside. he walked off. replays showed that the ball had gone off the glove that was not in contact with the bat. not out. ditto kaspa at trentbridge. now, did either of them know at that moment that they were, actually, not out?

 

[Cevno]

Cevno thinks the ball did a sharp right before going straight on to Dhoni. Don't worry about it.

Listen mate, you can hero worship Dhoni all you want, and I'll concede he's an excellent batsman and superb leader, but there's simply no way he can bowl deliveries that defy the laws of physics.

First of all,don't compare me with your crazy,stupid love of Morgan.Secondly,It didn't need to go at right angles and even you admitted after the snicko replay and Nasser hussain(ex England captain) and Alan wilkins were both convinced there was no clear evidence.
And there is no way any, technology can be better than the batsman himself.have you seriously played any cricket? There is no way you can bring one up and not the other,and that is why i brought Pietersen one up here to expose the hypocrisy. Neither be included....

 

[Cevno]

Cevno, I take it you believe KP too, when he says he knew he never edged it?

Or are you still suggesting Dhoni can move the ball at right angles with that one?

I wasn't convinced there was clear evidence in that case to overturn,as it was the same in both cases and there wasn't a huge gap as some said in the match thread too. But i am fine with it as it was marginal and didn't bring it up here until this morgan nonsense was brought up.