ICC Cricket World Cup 2019

England scored 97-1 in 11-20. Brilliant fearless cricket.
 
KM said:
I mean it was a pretty weak appeal mate. Loads of teams do this to evade the wide. Dharmasena is just rubbish.

I remember him giving Moeen Ali LBW thrice in three balls
Click to expand...
Snowle Gunnar Solskjær said:
He didn’t have a clue, it was so obvious. Maybe they should have a review option where they can admit that they haven’t got a clue can you check it for me rather than guess.
Click to expand...
The umpires can send it upstairs to check for a clean catch, why this didn't happen when he was so clearly clueless is anyone's guess
 
Robbo's Shoulder said:
The umpires can send it upstairs to check for a clean catch, why this didn't happen when he was so clearly clueless is anyone's guess
Click to expand...

Yeah but they don't check for snicko there. So if the umpire has deemed that the ball has touched the bat then 3rd umpire can't change the decision.
 
Robbo's Shoulder said:
The umpires can send it upstairs to check for a clean catch, why this didn't happen when he was so clearly clueless is anyone's guess
Click to expand...
Maybe the rules state that that's specifically and only to see if it carried/was inside the boundary.
 
Come on lads. As an Englishman let's not rewrite history on Dhoni. A brilliant chaser who should now move on.
 
Utd heap said:
Come on lads. As an Englishman let's not rewrite history on Dhoni. A brilliant chaser who should now move on.
Click to expand...

He should've moved on two years ago, that's my issue with him.
 
KM said:
Yeah but they don't check for snicko there. So if the umpire has deemed that the ball has touched the bat then 3rd umpire can't change the decision.
Click to expand...

I think that's normally because it's bloody obvious the player has hit it:

Playing conditions indicate to me that they're supposed to check for bat on ball:

Where the bowler’s end umpire is unable to decide upon a FairCatch or a Bump Ball, or if, on appeal from the fielding side, the batsman obstructed the field, he/she shall first consult with the striker’s end umpire.

Should both on-field umpires require assistance from the third umpire to make a decision, the bowler’s end umpire shall firstly take a decision on-field after consulting with the striker’s end umpire, before consulting by two-way radio with the third umpire. Such consultation shall be initiated by the bowler’s end umpire to the third umpire by making the shape of a TV screen with his/her hands, followed by a Soft Signal of Out or Not out made with the hands close to the chest at chest height. If the third umpire advises that the replay evidence is inconclusive, the on-field decision communicated at the start of the consultation process shall stand.


The third umpire shall determine whether the batsman has been caught, whether the delivery was a Bump Ball, or if the batsman obstructed the field. However, in reviewing the television replay(s), the third umpire shall first check the fairness of the delivery for all decisions involving a catch (all modes of No ball except for the bowler using an Illegal Bowling Action, subject to the proviso that the third umpire may review whether the bowler has used a prohibited Specific Variation under Article 6.2 of theIllegal Bowling Regulations) and whether the batsman has hit the ball.

If the delivery was not a fair delivery or if it is clear to the third umpire that the batsman did not hit the ball he/she shall indicate to the bowler’s end umpire that the batsman is Not out caught, and in the case of an unfair delivery, advise the bowler’s end umpire to signal No ball.
Click to expand...

What I'm not sure of is if Dharmasena could give it out, and then change his mind and go upstairs with it.
 
KM said:
Yeah but they don't check for snicko there. So if the umpire has deemed that the ball has touched the bat then 3rd umpire can't change the decision.
Click to expand...
I thought that if it was a catching dispute the full delivery is reviewed with the umpire giving a soft signal of out/not out. Only with run outs or stumping is the full delivery not reviewed. Anyway, wouldn't need snicko for that, could drive a double decker bus between that gap
 
NinjaFletch said:
I think that's normally because it's bloody obvious the player has hit it:

Playing conditions indicate to me that they're supposed to check for bat on ball:



What I'm not sure of is if Dharmasena could give it out, and then change his mind and go upstairs with it.
Click to expand...

Oh I've never seen the decision overturned like that so didn't knew it.
 
Robbo's Shoulder said:
I thought that if it was a catching dispute the full delivery is reviewed with the umpire giving a soft signal of out/not out. Only with run outs or stumping is the full delivery not reviewed. Anyway, wouldn't need snicko for that, could drive a double decker bus between that gap
Click to expand...

Yeah you're right. I stand corrected.
 
The last time I saw a world cup SF so one sided was India vs Kenya in 2003. Amazing by England.
 
NinjaFletch said:
I think that's normally because it's bloody obvious the player has hit it:

Playing conditions indicate to me that they're supposed to check for bat on ball:



What I'm not sure of is if Dharmasena could give it out, and then change his mind and go upstairs with it.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately I think "fair catch" is specifically whether the ball carried or not so the "fair catch law" can't be invoked if the ump is just unsure whether it hit the bat or not.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.