10th Match - Australia v West Indies

[TheJediBrah]

The umpiring was atrocious. It was a disgrace.

While I wouldn't call it a disgrace, they probably do need better education on the rules around how many bouncers per over should be allowed though. Because while it didn't affect the outcome of this match, their favouring of the WI by allowing 4 bouncers an over was definitely unfair on Australia.

 

[Borges]

So WI had doubts about these umpires before the match.

They weren't prescient; they had no clue before the match.
They started having doubts about the quality of umpiring as the match progressed; these doubts became stronger as event after event unfolded.

 

[TNT]

They weren't prescient; they had no clue before the match.
they started having doubts about the quality of umpiring as the match progressed; these doubts became stronger as event after event unfolded.

So the batsmen started to get worried about the balls that would hit their pads and be right in the umpires call zone. Yeah I can see how that would have a big impact on their confidence.

 

[cnerd123]

While I wouldn't call it a disgrace, they probably do need better education on the rules around how many bouncers per over should be allowed though. Because while it didn't affect the outcome of this match, their favouring of the WI by allowing 4 bouncers an over was definitely unfair on Australia.

how can anyone watching from front-on view have any idea on where the ball crosses the batsman is beyond me. Did someone actually take side-on camera replays of all the short balls and prove that the umpires were repeatedly letting bowlers get away with two or more bouncers in an over? Sincere question, because I have seen nothing of this on any mainstream news/media yet. Just seems to be commentators in this thread watching the telecast and nothing else.

Agree with the rest re. umpires being humans and being allowed to make mistakes. 4 mistakes in 600 balls of umpiring isn't bad umpiring. You have fielders who make more errors than that each and every game. For some reason you've got people who have never umpired a day in their lives thinking that match officials are immune to being human. That's why we have DRS idiots. Decision making is a judgement call, humans have imperfect judgement, and thanks to DRS there was no real lasting consequence on the outcome of the match. Storm in a teacup.

The real crime here is how the Holder and 'Remember the Name' played Starc's final over. They could have finished this game off with a bit of common sense. So disappointing to see. Russel's dismissal too - absolutely no need for it. And Hope's dismissal. And Hetmeyer's run-out. All that after the atrocious display from Australia's top order. Such bad cricket from both teams, and yet all they can do is complain about the umpires having an off day...

 

[h_hurricane]

I wouldn't go that far. Atrocious was touring Asia before neutral umpires.

Says someone who hasn't seen Daryl Harper and Darrel Hair officiate.
Every country had their fair share of poor umpires with the possible exception of England. Those guys always went by the books.

 

[Beamer]

The umpiring in this game was crap; these two gentlemen should not be allowed to officiate in any game where just one of the big three is playing.

It makes it very unfair on batsmen chasing a competitive score if they suspect, with good reason, that every close decision is going to be given against them; one wrong call and they wouldn't even have any reviews left.

Very well put. It didn't affect the result, we lost for other reasons but that doesn't mean what happened was right.

I saw things completely differently from Stephen, but I guess each to their own.

 

[Neil Young]

Very well put. It didn't affect the result, we lost for other reasons but that doesn't mean what happened was right.

What's your issue with what happened? All the umpiring mistakes were corrected by DRS, so I don't get what you think 'isn't right'. DRS has a role to play in pretty much every game.

 

[mr_mister]

You shouldn't be forced to constantly gamble on DRS time and time again to clean up the umpires mess

 

[TheJediBrah]

You shouldn't be forced to constantly gamble on DRS time and time again to clean up the umpires mess

The decisions weren't even that bad though. It's not like they were howlers, they were all relatively borderline calls. This whinging has been ridiculous.

 

[marc71178]

You shouldn't be forced to constantly gamble on DRS time and time again to clean up the umpires mess

If the decisions are big shockers then it's not a gamble.

 

[stephen]

If the decisions are big shockers then it's not a gamble.

Actually the WI got lucky with their gambles. Gayle could easily have lost them their review on his lbw. He was lucky the ball was hitting on umpires call.

Then Holder got lucky reviewing Maxwell. It did pitch outside leg but only by around 2cm.

If anything, the WI got the rub of the green.

 

[Burgey]

The umpiring in this game was crap; these two gentlemen should not be allowed to officiate in any game where just one of the big three is playing.

It makes it very unfair on batsmen chasing a competitive score if they suspect, with good reason, that every close decision is going to be given against them; one wrong call and they wouldn't even have any reviews left.

You’re now saying the umpires cheated. Well done. ****ing tin foil hat bull****. Pull your head in.

 

[Spark]

The conspiracy stuff is ludicrous and overblown, but it did give the game a somewhat farcical element.

 

[marc71178]

Actually the WI got lucky with their gambles. Gayle could easily have lost them their review on his lbw. He was lucky the ball was hitting on umpires call.

Then Holder got lucky reviewing Maxwell. It did pitch outside leg but only by around 2cm.

If anything, the WI got the rub of the green.

Umpires call is not getting lucky.

The ball pitching 2cm outside umpires call is not getting lucky. It is DRS being used correctly in its current guise.

 

[stephen]

Umpires call is not getting lucky.

The ball pitching 2cm outside umpires call is not getting lucky. It is DRS being used correctly in its current guise.

Not really. DRS is supposed to prevent howlers. That was not a howler by any means. It was a close call and the review was a piece of desperate luck. Holder was not convinced and waited a long time to call it.

Honestly, before DRS I think we'd have simply accepted those decisions and got on with life. Now we're getting the right result and more criticism of it.

 

[Beamer]

What's your issue with what happened? All the umpiring mistakes were corrected by DRS, so I don't get what you think 'isn't right'. DRS has a role to play in pretty much every game.

That all the bad decisions went against one team is my issue. It was remarkable. Anyway, we move on. It was a good match and I think both teams look in pretty good shape.

 

[stephen]

That all the bad decisions went against one team is my issue. It was remarkable. Anyway, we move on. It was a good match and I think both teams look in pretty good shape.

It was a good game and I definitely understand the emotional reaction to the umpiring. Honestly, I'm happy that the correct decision was achieved in each case (no ball free hit aside).

 

[vcs]

The ICC should chop off a finger for every incorrect decision until both forefingers are gone. Then they should sack them because they would be unable to give anyone out.

I'm on mobile so I can't check.. Did ***** like this post?

 

[smash84]

I'm on mobile so I can't check.. Did ***** like this post?

lol, no he didn't.

But now you've said it, and so i expect a like to appear soon