• 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* West Indies In Australia

Burgey

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Surely giving a batsman caught when he hasn't hit the ball is a howler?

There was nothing conclusive in the replays I saw which suggested Roach hit the ball - no deviation after ball passed bat, no twisting or wobbling of the bat as the ball passed, no hotspot on the edge. The only thing in favour was some sort of noise, which could have been anything.

There was no conclusive evidence that Roach hit the ball, there was simply a noise, which is not enough to conclusively say Roach hit it. Therefore, Roach shouldn't have been given out.

When it comes to caught behinds, saying Roach "might" have hit it isn't good enough, you have to be fairly certain he did hit it. Otherwise, the correct decision on review has to be not out.
I think this post goes more to whether the system's parameters are right, than whether the third umpire got the decision right within the current framework.

So, if the third umpire system was.to the effect that you give BOTD to the batsman, then that decision may well have been reversed. But the system as things stand (AFAIU) is the on-field decision stands unless there's compelling evidence to the contrary. Whether there was such evidence is, of course, a pretty arguable point here IMO.
 

Uppercut

Request Your Custom Title Now!
If there wasn't compelling evidence there that Roach hadn't hit the ball then there never will be. I'm sure sides will catch on pretty quickly that as it stands, if you're given out when you miss the ball you're out and there's not much use referring.
 

Burgey

Request Your Custom Title Now!
If there wasn't compelling evidence there that Roach hadn't hit the ball then there never will be. I'm sure sides will catch on pretty quickly that as it stands, if you're given out when you miss the ball you're out and there's not much use referring.
Yeah, that may end up being the case.
 

Manee

Cricketer Of The Year
I don't think people should be so sceptical, we can evolve the system to make it more effective such as the actual introduction of the 'benefit of the doubt' ruling.
 

Uppercut

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Yeah, it's improved out of sight since its use in the West Indies so I'm a bit more hopeful than I was that it'll further improve. This is definitely an area to look at.
 

Noble One

International Vice-Captain
Clint McKay. Impressions everyone? International class?

Probably let himself down by bowling too short on a pitch that demanded the ball to be pitched on a fuller length. But I thought for a debut, was solid, could easily have had 2-3 wickets. Will have to settle into being about 5th or 6th in line with the return of all the injured bowlers, but I am sure he will hardly diminish from the scene. Has improved remarkably over the past 18 months.
 

Top_Cat

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Solid 3rd bowler if the others are injured. Unless he starts to swing the ball more, I'd not back him to get a game outside of OZ.

EDIT: Agree he's improved heaps and I don't think he'd ever let the side down. See how he goes.
 
Last edited:

pasag

RTDAS
Clint McKay. Impressions everyone? International class?

Probably let himself down by bowling too short on a pitch that demanded the ball to be pitched on a fuller length. But I thought for a debut, was solid, could easily have had 2-3 wickets. Will have to settle into being about 5th or 6th in line with the return of all the injured bowlers, but I am sure he will hardly diminish from the scene. Has improved remarkably over the past 18 months.
Needs a little more time, hopefully he doesn't get McGained. Some ODIs will help heaps.
 

honestbharani

Whatever it takes!!!
The punishments handed out to Haddin, Watson and Johnson are a joke.. IMO, the 3 guys involved in the fracas were all equally responsible and the same fine should have been handed out to all..


But then again, not for the first time a bloke like Broad is treatng them with kid gloves while reserving the iron fist for the other team..
 

honestbharani

Whatever it takes!!!
Excellent work by Windies though.. Really gave Australia a fright. And kudos to the Aussies for being able to tackle the challenge.. Felt Windies deserved to win here but that is how things go sometimes.. Watson is coming along great as an opener and partnership breaker type bowler.. And credit to the Aussies for doing so well with so many of their best bowlers out..


And BTW, Bolly is your #1 bowler.. :wub:
 

andyc

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
The punishments handed out to Haddin, Watson and Johnson are a joke.. IMO, the 3 guys involved in the fracas were all equally responsible and the same fine should have been handed out to all..


But then again, not for the first time a bloke like Broad is treatng them with kid gloves while reserving the iron fist for the other team..
Well that, or because the Aussies aren't silly enough to plead not guilty to something they're clearly guilty of. Surely by now most players have realised that pleading guilty = much less punishment.
 

social

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
How the **** has Phil Hughes won a recall?

The guy is averaging 43 this season (with a horrible technique almost doomed to failure) whilst Jaques and Rogers are much better players in better form

An absolute joke selection IMO
 

social

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
The punishments handed out to Haddin, Watson and Johnson are a joke.. IMO, the 3 guys involved in the fracas were all equally responsible and the same fine should have been handed out to all..


But then again, not for the first time a bloke like Broad is treatng them with kid gloves while reserving the iron fist for the other team..
Did you actually watch any part of the series?

If you had then you'd know Benn was lucky not to be severely punished in Adelaide and that Perth was simply the straw that broke the camel's back
 

shivfan

Banned
Well that, or because the Aussies aren't silly enough to plead not guilty to something they're clearly guilty of. Surely by now most players have realised that pleading guilty = much less punishment.
Tony Cozier was perfectly right to criticise Chris Broad....

The problem was not pleading guilty or not guilty. The problem is that Benn was the only player charged under Level 2. The three Aussies were charged under Levels that offered lighter punishments.

Quite frankly, the way this disciplianry procedure is carried out, by the ICC and jokers like Chris Broad, it's designed to worsen relations, not to make them better. It would've made more sense for Benn, Haddin and Johnson to sit down and have a beer at the end of the day, and shake hands. They could easily move on from there. But Broad's one-sided judgment ensured that couldn't happen!
:@
 

shivfan

Banned
Excellent work by Windies though.. Really gave Australia a fright. And kudos to the Aussies for being able to tackle the challenge.. Felt Windies deserved to win here but that is how things go sometimes.. Watson is coming along great as an opener and partnership breaker type bowler.. And credit to the Aussies for doing so well with so many of their best bowlers out..


And BTW, Bolly is your #1 bowler.. :wub:
It was an excellent fightback by the Windies in the last two Tests, wasn't it?
:cool:
I'm proud of the guys....

It augurs well for the future. For once, we actually have players competing for spaces, instead of vacancies that we're struggling to fill.
 

shivfan

Banned
If there wasn't compelling evidence there that Roach hadn't hit the ball then there never will be. I'm sure sides will catch on pretty quickly that as it stands, if you're given out when you miss the ball you're out and there's not much use referring.
The problem is the use of Hotspot....

In some instances, it's been used in reviews to determine if a batsman touched the ball, and in some instances it is not.

The ICC and the umpires need to make up their mind how they use this particular piece of technology. Either you use it completely, and accept it's verdict on bat touching ball in all cases, or you don't use it at all....
 

Top