Was Subhman Gill's catch was clean?

[rkt.india]

6 hours ago, jalebi_bhai said:

It is out as per protocol. The only way Gill could've been saved is if the umpire deemed that Green was not in control of the ball. There was no evidence to prove otherwise. He plucked the ball in the air itself and managed to wrap enough of the ball.

 

The law states that the ball can touch the ground if the fielder is in complete control. Umpire deemed it so. At no point did the ball completely pop out of Green's hand.

 

Marginal, but unfortunately for us, technically the right call.

In control is when you are in control of your movements. Green was still moving and completing the catch so wasn't in control.

[vvvslaxman]

Will the umpires be consistent? I doubt so. If this is catch. You can just touch the ball somewhere near the bottom of the ball and claim it is a catch.

[rkt.india]

11 minutes ago, vvvslaxman said:

Will the umpires be consistent? I doubt so. If this is catch. You can just touch the ball somewhere near the bottom of the ball and claim it is a catch.

It's an error because the third umpire believed green and didn't take his time to check it.

[nevada]

Ball tampering, and now this. How desperate are the Aussies? The umpires seem to be blind. 

[RedFever]

11 hours ago, zen said:

It does as the catch is taken with the fingers.
 

you can even take a catch with 2 fingers under the ball with the ball touching the turf b/w those two fingers (one finger won’t do as in that case the ball is not under the control of the fielder)

Lol, this guy is simply hilarious, comes up with his own rules.

[RajBan]

15 hours ago, Vijy said:

was bound to nick one outside off soon enough. he was the one who went flashing at that ball. hard hands, no footwork, no decision making, etc

This is out actually. Those who have played little bit know this is how many catch gets taken. As long as the finger is under the ball which is in this case it does not matter whether the ball has touched the grass momentarily during the motion  because his grip on the ball already existed prior to ball coming in contact with surface.  On the other hand if his finger would not be under it , then it makes sense to nullify the catch because then he is taking significant support of the ground to restrict the ball popping out from his grip.

Edited June 11, 2023 by RajBan

[Vickydev]

30 minutes ago, RajBan said:

This is out actually. Those who have played little bit know this is how many catch gets taken. As long as the finger is under the ball which is in this case it does not matter whether the ball has touched the grass momentarily during the motion  because his grip on the ball already existed prior to ball coming in contact with surface.  On the other hand if his finger would not be under it , then it makes sense to nullify the catch because then he is taking significant support of the ground to restrict the ball popping out from his grip.

There are international cricketers who are questioning this catch tbf. It's clearly not as black and white as it's being claimed

[rkt.india]

59 minutes ago, RajBan said:

This is out actually. Those who have played little bit know this is how many catch gets taken. As long as the finger is under the ball which is in this case it does not matter whether the ball has touched the grass momentarily during the motion  because his grip on the ball already existed prior to ball coming in contact with surface.  On the other hand if his finger would not be under it , then it makes sense to nullify the catch because then he is taking significant support of the ground to restrict the ball popping out from his grip.

This is not out because the ball is not in the palm but between two fingers and as he is falling down to complete the catch, he grassed the ball and once the ball is grassed before completing the movement, it is not a catch. Ball was grassed as he wasn't in control of the ball.

[rtmohanlal]

not out .... simple .... the ball is seen touching the grass.....

[goose]

are some people here seriously pointing to contact between ball and grass as evidence of not out. how very disappointing. you all know or should no very well that fingers under ball is the litmus test not whether contact occurs.

[goose]

7 hours ago, Trichromatic said:

There is no way to prove that it's dissent.

i don’t need a court of law to know he’s showing dissent. a terrible attitude

[vvvslaxman]

6 hours ago, RajBan said:

This is out actually. Those who have played little bit know this is how many catch gets taken. As long as the finger is under the ball which is in this case it does not matter whether the ball has touched the grass momentarily during the motion  because his grip on the ball already existed prior to ball coming in contact with surface.  On the other hand if his finger would not be under it , then it makes sense to nullify the catch because then he is taking significant support of the ground to restrict the ball popping out from his grip.

 

Two fingers have to be underneat. Not one finger on the side. That means almost 80% of the bal on the ground.  Atleast that is what i interpret from the image. 

[badmash]

Ahhhhh yes! Of course 

 

Indian fans turning into Bangladesh fans 

[badmash]

https://www.indiatoday.in/amp/sports/cricket/story/shubman-gill-out-or-not-shastri-backs-umpires-decision-says-cameron-greens-fingers-were-wrapped-around-ball-2391447-2023-06-10

 

 

Shastri backs umpire's decision, says Cameron Green's fingers were wrapped around ball

 

Edited June 11, 2023 by badmash

[cowboysfan]

Gill will lose this Test place if we keep him as the opener,he is definitely not suited to open in Test cricket.

[coffee_rules]

KL has hope to make a comeback. Gill can be #3 and drop Pujara

[Vijy]

13 hours ago, cowboysfan said:

Gill will lose this Test place if we keep him as the opener,he is definitely not suited to open in Test cricket.

not very suited for MO as well, but can be tried for now

[vvvslaxman]

1 hour ago, Vijy said:

not very suited for MO as well, but can be tried for now

 

I can see a bit of attitude. Generally that is your no.1 enemy. If he thinks he belongs by default thanks to his scores on true wickets in shorter formats then he has a huge wake up call waiting for him.  Jaiswal put in the hard yards in first class. Even if he doesn't immediately adapt i expect him to come around. Very level headed guy. Gill had 4 opportunities to prove himself in WTC final. Failed in all 4.

[coffee_rules]

[BlueBlood]

This was a 50/50 decision but not a howler.

 

The rules clearly state Control of the ball and fingers underneath the ball.

 

There's no rule that states how many fingers or what percentage of the ball touches the ground.

 

I've seen many catches in the slip where a part of the ball always touches the ground. It's impossible without some part of the ball touching the ground in most tight slip catches.

 

Either way, Gill was a goner as Boland has his number. Aus had a clear strategy against him.

 

If this was an in red hot form Pant and this occurred to him, this would have been a match changing event but the way Gill played the entire game, he was a goner at any minute.