England v Australia, 1st Test TRENT BRIDGE commences 10/7/13

[RustyCage]

once it's reviewed it shouldn't matter what the umpire said, out is out

[Jim05]

OK, maybe Im a bit out of touch with technology in cricket these days, but you cqn you guys explain to me how the review shows: pitched in line, no bat, no no-ball, was hitting leg stump - How is that not given out?

Because if its a close one it goes back to umpires call.
The umpire gave Chris Rogers out, it went to review and was hitting leg stump by a bees dick so original decision stands.
Joe Root is given not out, the review shows it hitting leg stump but umpires decision stands.
Absolute farce

[Jim05]

once it's reviewed it shouldn't matter what the umpire said, out is out

Exactly

[JK]

Shits me that Beefy says its clearly hitting but not enough ball. If all elements are right and it's clearly hitting its been out for 100 years.
Pathetic, weak rule

So then the officials are admitting they don't have enough trust in the accuracy of the system, so then why have it at all? (apologies, Im sure there's been discussion about this already and this is a bad time to try and catch up)

[JK]

OK, maybe Im a bit out of touch with technology in cricket these days, but you cqn you guys explain to me how the review shows: pitched in line, no bat, no no-ball, was hitting leg stump - How is that not given out?

Because if its a close one it goes back to umpires call.
The umpire gave Chris Rogers out, it went to review and was hitting leg stump by a bees dick so original decision stands.
Joe Root is given not out, the review shows it hitting leg stump but umpires decision stands.
Absolute farce

Thanks mate, not a fan of that when it just cost us the Ashes (lol)

[am Bays]

OK, maybe Im a bit out of touch with technology in cricket these days, but you cqn you guys explain to me how the review shows: pitched in line, no bat, no no-ball, was hitting leg stump - How is that not given out?

Because it showed the ball only clipping the stumps and hitting the pads whilst they were just in front of the stumps and the original decision was not out

Because the review system gives the benefit of the doubt to the umpire. Basically if it is hitting the stumps or hitting in line with less than half the ball (clipping) if the umpire has given it not out it goes with his call. If Dar had given it out (like Dharmaseena (sp) did to Rodgers in our innings) and England reviewed it the decision of out would have stood as it was out.

The review system is there to get rid of the howlers (Katich's in 2005 when he smashed it into his pads of his bat and Bucknor gave him not out or Strauss' in Adelaide in 2006 on the last day when he clearly missed it). if its a 50:50 close call (doubt)the review system goes with the umpires call.

it's a good system.

[Aerie]

OK, maybe Im a bit out of touch with technology in cricket these days, but you cqn you guys explain to me how the review shows: pitched in line, no bat, no no-ball, was hitting leg stump - How is that not given out?

Because it showed the ball only clipping the stumps and hitting the pads whilst they were just in front of the stumps and the original decision was not out

Because the review system gives the benefit of the doubt to the umpire. Basically if it is hitting the stumps or hitting in line with less than half the ball (clipping) if the umpire has given it not out it goes with his call. If Dar had given it out (like Dharmaseena (sp) did to Rodgers in our innings) and England reviewed it the decision of out would have stood as it was out.

The review system is there to get rid of the howlers (Katich's in 2005 when he smashed it into his pads of his bat and Bucknor gave him not out or Strauss' in Adelaide in 2006 on the last day when he clearly missed it). if its a 50:50 close call (doubt)the review system goes with the umpires call.

it's a good system.

Yep, agree.

[RustyCage]

OK, maybe Im a bit out of touch with technology in cricket these days, but you cqn you guys explain to me how the review shows: pitched in line, no bat, no no-ball, was hitting leg stump - How is that not given out?

Because it showed the ball only clipping the stumps and hitting the pads whilst they were just in front of the stumps and the original decision was not out

Because the review system gives the benefit of the doubt to the umpire. Basically if it is hitting the stumps or hitting in line with less than half the ball (clipping) if the umpire has given it not out it goes with his call. If Dar had given it out (like Dharmaseena (sp) did to Rodgers in our innings) and England reviewed it the decision of out would have stood as it was out.

The review system is there to get rid of the howlers (Katich's in 2005 when he smashed it into his pads of his bat and Bucknor gave him not out or Strauss' in Adelaide in 2006 on the last day when he clearly missed it). if its a 50:50 close call (doubt)the review system goes with the umpires call.

it's a good system.

all it did was show that the umpire got it wrong

[Jim05]

OK, maybe Im a bit out of touch with technology in cricket these days, but you cqn you guys explain to me how the review shows: pitched in line, no bat, no no-ball, was hitting leg stump - How is that not given out?

Because it showed the ball only clipping the stumps and hitting the pads whilst they were just in front of the stumps and the original decision was not out

Because the review system gives the benefit of the doubt to the umpire. Basically if it is hitting the stumps or hitting in line with less than half the ball (clipping) if the umpire has given it not out it goes with his call. If Dar had given it out (like Dharmaseena (sp) did to Rodgers in our innings) and England reviewed it the decision of out would have stood as it was out.

The review system is there to get rid of the howlers (Katich's in 2005 when he smashed it into his pads of his bat and Bucknor gave him not out or Strauss' in Adelaide in 2006 on the last day when he clearly missed it). if its a 50:50 close call (doubt)the review system goes with the umpires call.

it's a good system.

Garbage system IMO
Wimbledon can get a line call to within 0.5mm with their technology.
Doesnt matter if it clips the stumps by 1mm or cannons into middle stump. If its out its out.
Would be quite happy to see both Rogers and Root given out, it has to be consistant.
You cant give one out but not the other. We have technology lets use it

[Jim05]

Root given out caught down leg side

[jackpot jim]

OK, maybe Im a bit out of touch with technology in cricket these days, but you cqn you guys explain to me how the review shows: pitched in line, no bat, no no-ball, was hitting leg stump - How is that not given out?

Because it showed the ball only clipping the stumps and hitting the pads whilst they were just in front of the stumps and the original decision was not out

Because the review system gives the benefit of the doubt to the umpire. Basically if it is hitting the stumps or hitting in line with less than half the ball (clipping) if the umpire has given it not out it goes with his call. If Dar had given it out (like Dharmaseena (sp) did to Rodgers in our innings) and England reviewed it the decision of out would have stood as it was out.

The review system is there to get rid of the howlers (Katich's in 2005 when he smashed it into his pads of his bat and Bucknor gave him not out or Strauss' in Adelaide in 2006 on the last day when he clearly missed it). if its a 50:50 close call (doubt)the review system goes with the umpires call.

it's a good system.

all it did was show that the umpire got it wrong

Umpire didn't get it wrong. He wasn't totally convinced in his mind it was out so gave it not out. Thats the way it works in cricket. Good system if it is used properly.

[RustyCage]

Seeya Root!

[am Bays]

all it did was show that the umpire got it wrong

Did it? You are making the assumption that hawkeye is 100% right. There is error associated with it. Minimal I grant you but still an error.

AS I said based on hawkeye the umpire may have got it wrong but not terribly wrong. The review system is there to get rid of the stinkers.

And as I type it looks like the benefit of a close decision might go our way.

[Jim05]

Thats plumb!!!

[Jim05]

You are a shocker Dar

[Jim05]

Seeya later Trott

[RustyCage]

gone! Seeya Trott!

[JK]

OK, more confused (but happier) now

[RustyCage]

all it did was show that the umpire got it wrong

Did it? You are making the assumption that hawkeye is 100% right. There is error associated with it. Minimal I grant you but still an error.

AS I said based on hawkeye the umpire may have got it wrong but not terribly wrong. The review system is there to get rid of the stinkers.

And as I type it looks like the benefit of a close decision might go our way.

The ball was hitting the stumps.

[Jim05]

OK, more confused (but happier) now

Dar is a deadset peanut, couldnt have got any plumber