• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Contentious decisions, UDRS, Wambulance Thread.

MW1304

Cricketer Of The Year
Something I'm sure we can all agree on is that Erasmus is a ****ing ****e umpire, on the pitch or in the box.
 

Cooky Monster

U19 12th Man
Bob Willis and Tom Moody both think that both decisions were ****e
They were, i don't know how anyone disagree with that opinion.

The Agar one is most galling though, no way Oz come back from 130 all out, would of been game over, Trotts would never of happened if the right decision was made with Agar and even if England did get a bad one like that it wouldn't of be as crucial as Trotts ended up being.
 

Adders

Cricketer Of The Year
I want you to get this **** where he breathes! I want you to find this nancy-boy Marais Erasmus, I want him DEAD! I want his family DEAD! I want his house burned to the GROUND! I wanna go there in the middle of the night and I wanna PISS ON HIS ASHES!
 
Last edited:

Furball

Evil Scotsman
That Agar stumping just gets worse every time I see it. How on earth you give that not out is beyond me.
 

Cabinet96

Global Moderator
Still think it does change shockers, so it's worthwhile, anyone that thought it would take all controversy out of the game were clearly silly.

Think they should have Third umpires that are specialist though, that know the system inside out, and keep on making those decisions. Get used to it, make for more consistency.

It's just silly having the normal umps, it's a totally different working environment, and some are going to be better with technology than others.
Yeah, agree completely.
 

TNT

Banned
Sometimes people see what they want to see in replays and interpret a result they want.
 

Uppercut

Request Your Custom Title Now!
They were, i don't know how anyone disagree with that opinion.

The Agar one is most galling though, no way Oz come back from 130 all out, would of been game over, Trotts would never of happened if the right decision was made with Agar and even if England did get a bad one like that it wouldn't of be as crucial as Trotts ended up being.
Well if Finn hadn't insisted on bowling a consistent torrent of sewage for an hour it would probably be game over anyway.

But I do think it was a terrible decision.
 

hendrix

Hall of Fame Member
I'm assuming that I'm not the only one hoping that Trott had Vaseline on his edges to help with hotspot?
this actually would be hilarious.

The thing with the ball tracking is that it doesn't seem to be able to recognize sharp movement.

I've seen examples where the ball hit one pad, then the next, and the tracker stopped at the second pad - which clearly screws up the trajectory of the delivery. They need to figure out a better way of stopping the tracking on impact.
 

vic_orthdox

Global Moderator
Also, I'm on the Trott hit it bandwagon, the fact that two different angles from front on indicated a deflection takes out the possibility if camera tricks.

On Agar, I think people overestimate how often the foot is up, it can still be touching the ground but people perceive it to only be doing so when they press it hard against it and you can see downward pressure on the ground. I have heard people say its irrelevant to the case (I kept on watching his foot for a lift in the few replays I watched, not the timing of the stumping) but thought it was a point worth making anyway.
 

howardj

International Coach
Trott hit it in my view

At the very least, with Snicko showing some activity and also the appearance of a deflection on the front on camera angle, there was not enough evidence to overturn the on-field umpire's decision

Once again, don't blame the technology, blame the use of it by the 3rd umpire
 
Last edited:

morgieb

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Agar seems line-ball personally. Was very hard to tell whether he got back on time. If pushed, I'd say he was out, but BOTD probably made the most sense. It'd have taken a brave umpire to give it.

As for Trott, I didn't watch it, so it's hard to say. Apparently Snicko suggests there was no nick, but it was lacking certain angles of HotSpot. Given how adamant Trott seemed that he hit it, and that Snicko doesn't count, it was probably best to stick with the on-field call, but it did seem like that was out.

But England have had some luck too. Although those were consistent with UDRS.
 

straw man

Hall of Fame Member
Thought Agar was probably out on the stumping and from watching this replay I'm firmly in the camp that Trott hit that lbw. Woeful that side-on hotspot was unavailable and the front-on is useless as Trott turns his bat the wrong way for us to see the relevant edge.
 

HeathDavisSpeed

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
I thought Agar was clearly out. I thought the crease line was clear enough from the stump angle and that none of his boot was behind it when the stumps were disturbed. The side on angle showing the stumps could only be disturbed by Prior taking off the bails. I was very surprised that it wasn't given out.
 

Spark

Global Moderator
Trott hit it in my view

At the very least, with Snicko showing some activity and also the appearance of a deflection on the front on camera angle, there was not enough evidence to overturn the on-field umpire's decision

Once again, don't blame the technology, blame the use of it by the 3rd umpire
Snicko showed absolutely no evidence of an edge, though that's irrelevant to the UDRS question.

Amazed that anyone can be sure that he hit it. I mean, doubt is fair but I'm really quite amazed at the level of conviction that he definitely hit it.
 

greg

International Debutant
Snicko showed absolutely no evidence of an edge, though that's irrelevant to the UDRS question.

Amazed that anyone can be sure that he hit it. I mean, doubt is fair but I'm really quite amazed at the level of conviction that he definitely hit it.
I'm not quite sure why nobody appears to have picked up on Dar's reaction to the decision. Frankly it's the closest i can remember coming to seeing an onfield umpire showing dissent at a DRS decision (after having to give it out he shrugged his shoulders and effectively gave a look of "what can i do?").

I wonder if a different outcome would have occurred if DRS decisions (as far as i can tell) weren't taken in total isolation, as opposed to in conference with the onfield umpire? Especially as these days all the players and the umpire can see the replays on the big screen. I can imagine a conversation going:

Erasmus: "I'm going to give him out"
Dar: "But I'm positive he hit it, can you take a closer look"
Erasmus: "Can't see anything on Hotspot"
Dar: "What about non hotspot replays"
...

Erasmus: "Well there might be a deflection..."
Dar: "Not out then!"
 

Burgey

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Snicko showed absolutely no evidence of an edge, though that's irrelevant to the UDRS question.

Amazed that anyone can be sure that he hit it. I mean, doubt is fair but I'm really quite amazed at the level of conviction that he definitely hit it.
Everyone's guilty of projection at times
 

Spark

Global Moderator
I'm not quite sure why nobody appears to have picked up on Dar's reaction to the decision. Frankly it's the closest i can remember coming to seeing an onfield umpire showing dissent at a DRS decision (after having to give it out he shrugged his shoulders and effectively gave a look of "what can i do?").

I wonder if a different outcome would have occurred if DRS decisions (as far as i can tell) weren't taken in total isolation, as opposed to in conference with the onfield umpire? Especially as these days all the players and the umpire can see the replays on the big screen. I can imagine a conversation going:

Erasmus: "I'm going to give him out"
Dar: "But I'm positive he hit it, can you take a closer look"
Erasmus: "Can't see anything on Hotspot"
Dar: "What about non hotspot replays"
...

Erasmus: "Well there might be a deflection..."
Dar: "Not out then!"
How is that evidence of anything at all, though?
 

TNT

Banned
What if the third umpire is only allowed to deal in yes or no. Did he hit it yes or no, is there a result on hot spot, does the non hot spot show a deflection.
 

Top