Australia tour of India - 4 tests

Didn't watch any of the last 2 hours of play. Under the circumstances, must have been some incredible batting by the Indian batsmen.
 
Reading Rahul's comments on cricinfo, he has said that 3rd day is usually best to bat generally in Bangalore and he and team found it easier than first innings because on first day the dampness in pitch got ball to bounce more.
I think if batsmen apply themselves properly on this pitch, it is not impossible one to bat on. Still a tough one of course. Little bit of luck is needed as cracks are going to make some balls shoot up and some keep low. Target of 200+ will be very challenging with added pressure of 4th innings chase.
 
Moby said:
Thought's on Kohli's dismissal?

Imo the benefit of the doubt should have been given to the batsman there.
Click to expand...
They need to use Hotspot technology.

The 3rd Umpire was saying "No conclusive evidence to say he hit it first". If the on field umpire had given it not out and it had been a review by Australia then the 3rd Umpire would have said "No conclusive evidence that bat is not involved".
 
Moby said:
Thought's on Kohli's dismissal?

Imo the benefit of the doubt should have been given to the batsman there.
Click to expand...

DRS doesn't work like that. It's essentially benefit of the doubt with the umpire's original decision, with conclusive evidence required to overturn the original decision. In Kohli's dismissal, the third umpire needed conclusive evidence that Kohli had hit the ball or been hit outside off stump. In his view, Kohli's pad was struck before pad and ball tracking proved he hadn't been hit outside the line of off stump. If the umpire's original decision had been not out and Australia reviewed the decision, it would have remained not out, so there's a fine line with Kohli's dismissal.
 
MN is correct but that is precisely the problem with DRS. Imagine in football, if goal line technology can't conclusively tell if it is a goal or not, refs revert to original decision of goal they had given. People would go apeshit.

With exactly same data and tools, returning a different result just because of the original on field decision is stupid and recipe for more controversy. It should have been like run out third umpire review where on field umpire's decision does not matter when TV review has been called for.
 
Mitchell Nicholas said:
DRS doesn't work like that. It's essentially benefit of the doubt with the umpire's original decision, with conclusive evidence required to overturn the original decision. In Kohli's dismissal, the third umpire needed conclusive evidence that Kohli had hit the ball or been hit outside off stump. In his view, Kohli's pad was struck before pad and ball tracking proved he hadn't been hit outside the line of off stump. If the umpire's original decision had been not out and Australia reviewed the decision, it would have remained not out, so there's a fine line with Kohli's dismissal.
Click to expand...
Yeah, you are right. Given the confines of how the rules are structured, the course of events can be explained by what you said. However, it does beg the question of the use of this technology if we are unable to tell for sure if the batsman is out or now?

Imagine a goal-line technology that doesn't really tell you conclusively if the ball has crossed the line. Or a hawk-eye in tennis saying, "there is no conclusive evidence that the line umpire's call is wrong so player x wins match point"?
 
Good review by Rahane. I thought it was just clipping, thus umpires call staying out.
 
Australia now in a great position to win a series in India for the first time since 2004, if they're good enough and want it enough.
 
So, Australia need 188 to win the match. I'm confident they've got this.
 
Whatever the result the cricket.com.au and fox sports Australia Facebook pages won't be worth reading due to the immature comments from supporters of both sides.
 
Shaun Marsh is out lbw. Hard to sympathise with a batsmen who offers no shot.
 
Shaun Marsh would have been given not out on DRS if he reviewed the decision. I'll say it again, no sympathy for a batsman who offers no shot.
 
Still think Australia will scratch and claw their way to victory but it'll be a nail biter.
 
Oooh boy!! Aussie middle order is a touch better than Indian middle order. This should be interesting
 
India will win this, its Wade next and then the bowlers.

There's already a bowler in the middle, Marsh (he's shit).
 
In a spot of bother now. Starc can bat but I'm worried about Hazlewood, "Garry" and O'Keefe.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.