Message Board Archives

He should have. He's an important batsman. Ball hits high. Tall bowler. Bad strategy to not review. Plus it puts umpire on notice that batsman not given benefit of the doubt.

In reply to Trinidave

Why should he the match ending
Sunday

We need to have a more holistic approach to how we take our reviews. We have to look at in match situations and the importance and value of certain wickets.

In reply to Trinidave

Cause it wud have been umpire's call and he wud still be out.

In reply to Trinidave

Would you want to stay out there, late in the day, with Archer on the rampage?

In reply to Maispwi

That's not the point. It's because:

1. Chase is a very important wicket, and it's worth the appeal. Chase is tall, got hit above knee roll to a tall bowler

2. Every Umpire's call that is out is a bad decision because the batsman should get the benefit of doubt. An appeal will draw the Umpire's attention to this and hopefully positively affect other decisions.

In reply to Trinidave

I disagree with that

If the umpire had no doubt that the batsman was out, then umpires call confirms that certainty. You don’t see a ball missing the stumps denoted as “umpires call”

If the umpire had doubt, that’s when the benefit of doubt should go to the batsman.

When the bowling side appeals after a not out decision for LBW, and the ball is shown clipping the stump and “umpires call” is the ruling, then that’s confirmation of the umpire giving the benefit of the doubt to the batsman.

In reply to imusic

The problem is a review system has shifted the focus from the benefit of the doubt for the batsmen to protect the umps.

In reply to Trinidave

Explain

Traditionally the benefit of the doubt goes to the batsman. If DRS shows the ball clipping the nail, by definition there is doubt. But even if the ump calls a "doubtful" decision out, then that decision stands.

There is no way an ump could say with certainty that that Chase LBW was hitting the stumps.

In reply to Trinidave

But that’s exactly what happened. You adding mind reader to your skill set bruh?

In reply to Trinidavethere was also a Chase in the second test that I thought he would review.

In reply to Trinidave

The review system was brought out to get rid of howlers not marginal decisions dat ball tracking cannot itself determine with 100% accuracy. In dat regard it goes back to whatever the umpire had decided.

In reply to imusic

The DRS is not 100% perfect. It has a margin of error. That is why if the ball is clipping the stumps the television umpire cannot say for sure that the DRS is right and the on field umpire is wrong. Therefore whatever call the on field umpire made will have to stand as correct. The issue though is that if the ball is shown to be clipping then more times than not a good umpire ought to have had some doubt in his mind whether the ball was hitting the stumps. If the umpire was confident that the ball was smashing into the stumps when the ball was barely clipping the stumps then the umpire in my mind made an error. It means his judgment was off and the doubt he ought to have had he didn't have it because his judgment was faulty.

In reply to b4u8me2

Ball tracking technology is an estimate. It’s not 100% guaranteed. Meaning that just because ball tracking says it was going to clip the stump, does t necessarily mean it was going to clip it, hit it dead on, or miss it altogether.

Which is why in those instances, it goes back to the umpires call.

As Maispwi said, DRS was implemented to deal with howlers. It does that very effectively.

In reply to imusic

Huh?

In reply to b4u8me2

Bingo!