• 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.

***Official*** England in New Zealand series 2013

Howe_zat

Audio File
Camera from point showed the bat was just in front of pad, suggesting bat first, so I'd have given that not out. Can't really complain either way though.
 

straw man

Hall of Fame Member
Not enough evidence to overturn means go with onfield umpire's decision is exactly what I'd like to see consistently from third umpire. I believe some third umpires around the world have had problems following this recently.
 

thierry henry

International Coach
As the ball is spherical, doesn't only 1 infinitely small part of it initially touch the pad, making a nonsense of all this "half the ball inside the line" palaver? I'm not good at maths or physics or whatever btw.
 

Hurricane

Hall of Fame Member
Doull is saying that because a fraction of the ball hit in the line (not even half the ball) then you can be out.

Is that really the rule? When I umpire in club games unless it is clearly in line I give the batsman the benefit.
 

Top