They were, i don't know how anyone disagree with that opinion.Bob Willis and Tom Moody both think that both decisions were ****e
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!Erasmus
Yeah, agree completely.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.
Well if Finn hadn't insisted on bowling a consistent torrent of sewage for an hour it would probably be game over anyway.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.
this actually would be hilarious.I'm assuming that I'm not the only one hoping that Trott had Vaseline on his edges to help with hotspot?
Snicko showed absolutely no evidence of an edge, though that's irrelevant to the UDRS question.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
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?").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 timesSnicko 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.
How is that evidence of anything at all, though?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!"