1st ODI - Umpiring

[flamy]

^ LAL

[thevortex]

Again' date=' as you say, your observation is based on a view from a parallax angle. You cannot consider it being impossible based on that view.[/quote'] Teacup (and My Two Cents) - technology in cricket right now has not progressed to the extent that every decision is hundred percent doubt free. I doubt that we will get there even eventually. If we use the data that the replays give and then use some intuition it should be clear that it would have been a physical impossibility for Sachin to pull the ball back without touching the ropes. Now, there are two ways of going about this. Give it a 3 because technology cannot show you that Sachin touched the ropes. Or you could use some cricketing experience and common sense and rule it a 4 even if you had not seen this happen very clearly. I know this is eminently arguable and debatable. Which is why we are discussing this anyway :). I wish cricket too would not go down like some of these court cases where criminals are acquitted based on technicalities and semantics not on the basis of justice. That is where the spirit of cricket should count and prevail over the wordings of the laws of the game. Just my silly romantic notion - lets say :).

[teacup]

Teacup (and My Two Cents) - technology in cricket right now has not progressed to the extent that every decision is hundred percent doubt free. I doubt that we will get there even eventually. If we use the data that the replays give and then use some intuition it should be clear that it would have been a physical impossibility for Sachin to pull the ball back without touching the ropes. Now, there are two ways of going about this. Give it a 3 because technology cannot show you that Sachin touched the ropes. Or you could use some cricketing experience and common sense and rule it a 4 even if you had not seen this happen very clearly. I know this is eminently arguable and debatable. Which is why we are discussing this anyway :). I wish cricket too would not go down like some of these court cases where criminals are acquitted based on technicalities and semantics not on the basis of justice. That is where the spirit of cricket should count and prevail over the wordings of the laws of the game. Just my silly romantic notion - lets say :).

When you look at the image above from a parallax angle you would think that the ball is almost touching the block behind it but when the angle changes you notice there is considerable gap between them. What we all saw on TV via the replays were the worst possible angles to judge the position of the cricket ball with respect to the boundary line. You simply cannot make any judgement based on it. I would have accepted a zoomed in grainy view from a better angle where at least the gap between the ball and the boundary was visible.