• 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.

DRS question

kiwiviktor81

International Debutant
Bowler bowls to batsman, batsman plays a stroke, misses and his hit on the pad. The fielding team appeals for lbw.

The umpire thinks that the batsman was struck inside the line but that the ball was missing the stumps, so he gives it not out.

The fielding team review.

Upon review, it is discovered that the ball is going on to hit the stumps fully, but that the impact of the ball on the pads was umpire's call.

Is it out or not?
 

SteveNZ

International Vice-Captain
So even though the umpire is 100% satisfied that the ball would have hit the stumps, it's not out?
What an umpire thought on field should be absolutely irrelevant when you have technology that you deem is better than their adjudication. And I don't mean that in your example, I mean it in all instances.
 

Shady Slim

International Regular
i think you're misinterpreting the question guys

pretty sure that umpire's call defaults to "all outs" or "all nots" even if they think it's somewhere dismissal-allowing and in other places working against the dismissal
 

Flametree

State Vice-Captain
This thread highlights an issue with DRS. The umpire should have to say why they give it not out (at club level, we all did when I played. I can remember having a laugh with a bowler when I umpired and told him "He's outside the line, sorry, and though I don't know the name of it, he was playing some sort of shot"... ) If the ump gives it not out because he thinks there was an inside edge, but is happy with everything else, then the batsman should be out if replays show no edge, even if there's an umpire's call in the mix.

Really this just highlights my biggest bugbear with DRS... why is there an umpire's call on point of impact? We have ball-tracker, either the ball hits pad in line with the stumps or it doesn't. It isn't a matter of opinion. (I admit to not knowing the rule - is it some part of the ball in line, all the ball in line, or more than 50%? But whatever the rule is, technology can without any dispute show us this...)
 

TNT

Banned
This thread highlights an issue with DRS. The umpire should have to say why they give it not out (at club level, we all did when I played. I can remember having a laugh with a bowler when I umpired and told him "He's outside the line, sorry, and though I don't know the name of it, he was playing some sort of shot"... ) If the ump gives it not out because he thinks there was an inside edge, but is happy with everything else, then the batsman should be out if replays show no edge, even if there's an umpire's call in the mix.

Really this just highlights my biggest bugbear with DRS... why is there an umpire's call on point of impact? We have ball-tracker, either the ball hits pad in line with the stumps or it doesn't. It isn't a matter of opinion. (I admit to not knowing the rule - is it some part of the ball in line, all the ball in line, or more than 50%? But whatever the rule is, technology can without any dispute show us this...)
The reason for umpires call is because ball tracking is not 100% accurate.
 

Spark

Global Moderator
This thread highlights an issue with DRS. The umpire should have to say why they give it not out (at club level, we all did when I played. I can remember having a laugh with a bowler when I umpired and told him "He's outside the line, sorry, and though I don't know the name of it, he was playing some sort of shot"... ) If the ump gives it not out because he thinks there was an inside edge, but is happy with everything else, then the batsman should be out if replays show no edge, even if there's an umpire's call in the mix.

Really this just highlights my biggest bugbear with DRS... why is there an umpire's call on point of impact? We have ball-tracker, either the ball hits pad in line with the stumps or it doesn't. It isn't a matter of opinion. (I admit to not knowing the rule - is it some part of the ball in line, all the ball in line, or more than 50%? But whatever the rule is, technology can without any dispute show us this...)
It is sort of a matter of opinion tbf, in particular it's a matter of which frame the guy putting the projection together decides represents the "impact" point. It's not automatically done, a person makes that decision.
 

TNT

Banned
This thread highlights an issue with DRS. The umpire should have to say why they give it not out (at club level, we all did when I played. I can remember having a laugh with a bowler when I umpired and told him "He's outside the line, sorry, and though I don't know the name of it, he was playing some sort of shot"... ) If the ump gives it not out because he thinks there was an inside edge, but is happy with everything else, then the batsman should be out if replays show no edge, even if there's an umpire's call in the mix.

...)
All the umpires has to do is say "not out" and then the players should accept the umpires decision. That was one of the qualities of cricket, players accepted the umpires decision.
 

Howe_zat

Audio File
The reason for umpires call is because ball tracking is not 100% accurate.
Why does this idea still persist?

If the 'umpire's call' region was anything to do with error in the technology it would change depending on the circumstances. It's there to keep the umpire's natural bias towards not out decisions.

Amazing how cricket keeps shooting itself in the foot. Must have a rule that makes everybody lose faith in the system we're using.
 
Last edited:

Stefan9

State Vice-Captain
The reason for umpires call is because ball tracking is not 100% accurate.
Its more accurate then an umpire. I rather trust ball tracking tech. Personally there should be no umpires call and we should go with ball tracking.
 

Groundking

International Debutant
Also can somebody explain to me why it being 'in-line' matters at all? Like why were reviews instantly satisfied as not out as soon as it was found they pitched outside the line in the most recent ODI between England and South Africa, even though they still might have gone onto hit the stumps.
 

Stefan9

State Vice-Captain
Also can somebody explain to me why it being 'in-line' matters at all? Like why were reviews instantly satisfied as not out as soon as it was found they pitched outside the line in the most recent ODI between England and South Africa, even though they still might have gone onto hit the stumps.
Because that's the rules of the game. Pitched outside of while offering a shot is not out ( can still be out if no shot was offered) and pitching outside leg is not out no matter whether a shot is offered or not.
 
Last edited:

Adders

Cricketer Of The Year
Also can somebody explain to me why it being 'in-line' matters at all? Like why were reviews instantly satisfied as not out as soon as it was found they pitched outside the line in the most recent ODI between England and South Africa, even though they still might have gone onto hit the stumps.
Are you talking about "pitched" outside the line or "impact"?? Both are critical to the LBW law.

The ball can pitch outside off stump and still be out LBW but if it pitches outside leg then it's not out. Impact (as in where the ball hits the pad always) has to be in the line of the stumps.
 

Adders

Cricketer Of The Year
Because that's the rules of the game. Pitched outside of while offering a shot is not out ( can still be out if no shot was offered) and pitching outside leg is out no matter whether a shot is offered or not.

Have a spell mate.
 

Burgey

Request Your Custom Title Now!
All the umpires has to do is say "not out" and then the players should accept the umpires decision. That was one of the qualities of cricket, players accepted the umpires decision.
We all know that changed at Sydney in 2008.
 

OverratedSanity

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Man it amazes me how Australians still seam to have all the sand from Sydney's beaches in their vags when it comes to that match. You guys won the match ffs. The result of the game wasn't changed or anything.

Poor England don't complain nearly as much as they should that Oval 06 was retroactively turned into a draw.
 
Last edited:

Top