Should Ricky Ponting cop a ban?

[silentstriker]

It's irrelevant whether he hit it or not. It's not like decision was going to be changed either way, and people have been fined for barely looking at the umpire.

In any case, if there is no snicko, there is no hotspot, there is no deviation, and you can't tell in the slomo - that's way past the three sigma rule and he didn't hit it.

[Burgey]

Originally Posted by SteveNZ

This doesn't excuse Ponting's pathetic attack at technology, given he was citing a mark on Hotspot that came from the pad, but KP hit that - absolutely he hit that. The slo-mo view up close clearly shows a deviation. I don't know if the umpires saw that view, however.

You don't get suspended for attacking technology in interviews mate. If you did Roger Federer wouldn't have competed in a tennis major for three years.

[SteveNZ]

Originally Posted by Burgey

You don't get suspended for attacking technology in interviews mate. If you did Roger Federer wouldn't have competed in a tennis major for three years.

Quite right sir. You get suspended for attacking umpires, which D. Ponting made a pretty fair effort of.

And previous mentions of double standards are completely right. I remember Kyle Mills getting done 20% or so of his match fee for merely not turning around when appealing for an lbw. So 40% when you have previous history, and are supposed to be an international captain upholding the spirit of the game, is weak as anything.

I wonder if Ponting still wonders why no one bothered to go along with his 'take a fielder's word' edict a while back.

[Burgey]

Originally Posted by SteveNZ

Quite right sir. You get suspended for attacking umpires, which D. Ponting made a pretty fair effort of.

And previous mentions of double standards are completely right. I remember Kyle Mills getting done 20% or so of his match fee for merely not turning around when appealing for an lbw. So 40% when you have previous history, and are supposed to be an international captain upholding the spirit of the game, is weak as anything.

I wonder if Ponting still wonders why no one bothered to go along with his 'take a fielder's word' edict a while back.

Yeah that's right. But whether he says in an interview that he still thinks it was out despite hotspot etc is irrelevant, frankly. That's all I was saying

[SteveNZ]

That it is, we certainly agree on that. His attack on technology definitely wasn't my issue. Given how much I dislike it (in its current state) I couldn't say any different

[Jacknife]

Originally Posted by SteveNZ

Seems that's your opinion..mine, and that of others, is that at 1:20 in here - YouTube - Ashes 2010 - Ponting v Umpire (Possible Pietersen Wicket) - it clips the inside edge.

That clip shows no deviation what so ever,not even slightly , the ball carries rotating the same all the way past KPs' bat. The replay that Sky were showing and the commentators at the time were in agreement that the mark at the bottom of KPs' bat was when he skimmed the side/front of his pad after the ball went passed and that is certainly how it looked to me. Most of the comments left on youtube who left a relevant comment, thought it wasn't out as well, as well as most on here.

[Redbacks]

Originally Posted by Jacknife

That clip shows no deviation what so ever,not even slightly , the ball carries rotating the same all the way past KPs' bat. The replay that Sky were showing and the commentators at the time were in agreement that the mark at the bottom of KPs' bat was when he skimmed the side/front of his pad after the ball went passed and that is certainly how it looked to me.

I agree, what's interesting is that looking at the replay of the youtube clip, it doesn't look like the bottom of his bat gets near his pad. The white speck on the toe is clearly a lot lower than where the ball passed the bat. The hotspot and front on vision side by side would probably clear that up further.

[Jacknife]

Originally Posted by Redbacks

I agree, what's interesting is that looking at the replay of the youtube clip, it doesn't look like the bottom of his bat gets near his pad. The white speck on the toe is clearly a lot lower than where the ball passed the bat. The hotspot and front on vision side by side would probably clear that up further.

Yes, on Sky Nasser thought it was from his bat and they eventually showed the front on shot and another angle, from I think from over mid off's head, that you could see that KP brings his bat around the front of his pad and appears to just skim it.

[Spark]

If he did hit it, it was the finest edge in history and I'm not going to begrudge any umpire who doesn't give that one.

[andyc]

Not out for mine ftr.

[Prince EWS]

It was actually Hilfenhaus; not Ponting. I swear.
And yes he deserves a long, long ban for it.

[zaremba]

Originally Posted by Burgey

Pietersen is a **** though. Should be booed for breathing.

Yeah there's a lot of truth in this

[Evermind]

Really amazed at how people don't "trust technology" in this case. If you put stuff in the fridge, it gets cold. If you put stuff in the microwave, it gets hot. There's no guesswork there. But snicko and hotspot say no edge, and people try to second guess the whole thing and think they know better.

Not unlike the creationism vs evolution debate. "Yeah, them dinosaurs was created by gawd in 5000 BC/are liberal propaganda".

[Spark]

Snicko is irrelevant, and hotspot does tend to miss very fine edges (probably because they're so fine that they don't produce the kind of "impact" heat that hotspot needs to work)

[Evermind]

Originally Posted by Spark

Snicko is irrelevant, and hotspot does tend to miss very fine edges (probably because they're so fine that they don't produce the kind of "impact" heat that hotspot needs to work)

If hotspot misses it, then it should be defined as "not out".

Also, snicko can be used selectively. From what I understand, the controversy comes from the fact that a sound may have come from any source - bat on pad, ball on pad, etc. But if there is no sound at all, then nothing has touched anything, and it's safe to assume that there's no edge.

In this case, either way, it's as not out as it gets.