AB De Villiers Joins Ponting on Elite Umpires List

[Saj]

Browne hit a huge shot down the ground off the bowling of Langveldt.

De Villiers was the man at the long off boundary. He caught the ball near to the boundary and gave the batsman out. Only problem was his foot had touched the rope. Batsman took his word for it and started to walk towards the pavilion. Then the replay showed De Villiers foot touching the advertising rope as he caught the ball.

Why cant cricketers remain cricketers and if they arent sure of whether a catch was taken cleanly, leave it to the umpires to make the decisions.

[Fish]

Tendulkar has joined the list aswell, tonight he stood on his stumps and dislodged the bails but instead of leaving the field he took a run and made out he didnt touch the stumps and made the umpires check with the third umpire to tell him to go.

[Bublu Bhuyan]

Originally Posted by Fish Tendulkar has joined the list aswell, tonight he stood on his stumps and dislodged the bails but instead of leaving the field he took a run and made out he didnt touch the stumps and made the umpires check with the third umpire to tell him to go.

That's Tendulkar's right. He didn't say that he was not out. He was just too taken aback and surprised, and thus asked for the umpire's conformation.

[KB]

Tendulkar has joined the list aswell, tonight he stood on his stumps and dislodged the bails but instead of leaving the field he took a run and made out he didnt touch the stumps and made the umpires check with the third umpire to tell him to go.

What's the difference between standing your ground when you have hit your own stumps or when you have edged to the keeper?

[Neighbourhood policewala]

The SA game was a disaster when u see the no ball that Ramdin got out to, funny thing is that Brian Jerling was stood at square leg saying that he didnt see it, despite his view being unobstructed......we need 2 neutral umpires for all games I think!!!

[Fish]

Originally Posted by bublubhuyan That's Tendulkar's right. He didn't say that he was not out. He was just too taken aback and surprised, and thus asked for the umpire's conformation.

What if the umpire didnt give him out, he was going to stay there.

[Fish]

Originally Posted by ggm What's the difference between standing your ground when you have hit your own stumps or when you have edged to the keeper?

Yes I did see that one where Pathan nicked the ball to the keeper and didnt walk.

[161]

Originally Posted by Saj Browne hit a huge shot down the ground off the bowling of Langveldt. De Villiers was the man at the long off boundary. He caught the ball near to the boundary and gave the batsman out. Only problem was his foot had touched the rope. Batsman took his word for it and started to walk towards the pavilion. Then the replay showed De Villiers foot touching the advertising rope as he caught the ball. Why cant cricketers remain cricketers and if they arent sure of whether a catch was taken cleanly, leave it to the umpires to make the decisions.

well that's because umpires usually wait to see if the players can figure things out for themselves before they are forced to make a call ..

if a batsman walks on his own .. a fielder confidently takes a catch etc.. umpires are usually happy just taking their word.

and why might u ask do umpires do this ... well i guess they are afraid of making the wrong decision .. umpires only have their eyes and ears .. but TV slow-motion replays, hot spot, snicko, hawkeye will all be used to prove them wrong.

[JustAnotherFan]

Originally Posted by Saj Browne hit a huge shot down the ground off the bowling of Langveldt. De Villiers was the man at the long off boundary. He caught the ball near to the boundary and gave the batsman out. Only problem was his foot had touched the rope. Batsman took his word for it and started to walk towards the pavilion. Then the replay showed De Villiers foot touching the advertising rope as he caught the ball. Why cant cricketers remain cricketers and if they arent sure of whether a catch was taken cleanly, leave it to the umpires to make the decisions.

Hey, Saj you do have x-ray eyesight or another few camera angles there.

I think AB judged things on the dance he did to keep his balance to avoid the "boundary rope" i.e. part 2. In part 1 his momentum took him back and he came near the rope and then he stepped forward and did his dance (part 2) and showed everyone the finger.

This was looked at from all angles on TV and commentated on. Are Saffer commentators that biased?

In my opinion that was so close I still don't know what the 3rd umpire saw. Maybe he should be on the field instead of one of the other umpires i.e. Jerling.

[AK600]

Originally Posted by Fish Tendulkar has joined the list aswell, tonight he stood on his stumps and dislodged the bails but instead of leaving the field he took a run and made out he didnt touch the stumps and made the umpires check with the third umpire to tell him to go.

wow your a bright bulb lol

theres a difference between an obvious edge and a faint touch, it shows how intelligent you are if you compare them both.

[W63L35]

Originally Posted by bublubhuyan That's Tendulkar's right. He didn't say that he was not out. He was just too taken aback and surprised, and thus asked for the umpire's conformation.

..and the bottom line is Sachin can't make a mistake but others can!

[KB]

No doubt in my mind that AB touched the boundary skirting. However it was only a 'flick' of the skirting and so he probably was not aware that he just very faintly touched it.

[Saj]

Originally Posted by ggm No doubt in my mind that AB touched the boundary skirting. However it was only a 'flick' of the skirting and so he probably was not aware that he just very faintly touched it.

ggm, even more reason for him to perhaps shrug his shoulders and say I'm not sure, rather than immediately put up his finger and give the batsman out?

[PlanetPakistan]

Saj,
With low catches the 2 D TV pics will almost always create an illusion that the ball has bounced before going in to the fielder's hands. So i say we let the fielders decide- its about time that we bring some honesty back in the game.

[161]

Originally Posted by PlanetPakistan Saj, With low catches the 2 D TV pics will almost always create an illusion that the ball has bounced before going in to the fielder's hands. So i say we let the fielders decide- its about time that we bring some honesty back in the game.

right .. on TV replays u can always make the case that a catch wasn't clean..


for example misbah's catch off of tanvir in the 5th ODI..

it was clean as a whistle but third umpire didn't give it !!

[Random Aussie]

One of the reasons Oz tries to push the "accept the fielder's word" agreement is that a few years ago in Australia it got so bad that batsman were standing their ground after pulling the ball to fine leg - the camera angles could often not prove the catch was clean so batsman was given not out. It was ridiculous.

[deathstreak]

Originally Posted by Random Aussie One of the reasons Oz tries to push the "accept the fielder's word" agreement is that a few years ago in Australia it got so bad that batsman were standing their ground after pulling the ball to fine leg - the camera angles could often not prove the catch was clean so batsman was given not out. It was ridiculous.

Think it should also be which fielder right?

[tmac4real]

lol saj love the title.

[OZGOD]

Originally Posted by W63L35 ..and the bottom line is Sachin can't make a mistake but others can! Originally Posted by AK600 wow your a bright bulb lol theres a difference between an obvious edge and a faint touch, it shows how intelligent you are if you compare them both.

I think there's a difference between when a Australian player does it (he's a cheat as he should give himself out if the umpire doesn't do it) and if an Indian player does it (it's his right to let the umpire make the decision).

[deathstreak]

Originally Posted by OZGOD I think there's a difference between when a Australian player does it (he's a cheat as he should give himself out if the umpire doesn't do it) and if an Indian player does it (it's his right to let the umpire make the decision).

Are we still talking about clarke and pathan here right?
I doubt if anyone cares that Symonds did not walk, but more about Clarke look after the umpire's decision and his word on the catch.

It was never a case of walking when you nick. Only Gilchrist does that and that's his personal right. What others do when they nick is their right. That's what the umpires are for.

As for deVillers I doubt he would have felt the faint touch. That's idea about having cushioned shoes. Sachin's dismissal I think you can make out what he said to the umpire. The words I didn't feel it can be easily heard. He was doubtful and he said so. Of course for it will be taken as whining begging etc by some people.

[JustAnotherFan]

Originally Posted by OZGOD I think there's a difference between when a Australian player does it (he's a cheat as he should give himself out if the umpire doesn't do it) and if an Indian player does it (it's his right to let the umpire make the decision).

You tell them, mate.

P.S. Hope you looking forward to dog eats dog S14.

[OZGOD]

Originally Posted by JustAnotherFan You tell them, mate. P.S. Hope you looking forward to dog eats dog S14.

Mate, my team's been gutted - Vickerman heading off after this season, Kanaar retiring. Just as long as we make the top 6 I'm happy.