UDRS in India vs Eng match : Ian Bell - Not Out? Really?

[Manny_Pacquiao]

2.5 m forward is the golden rule in TV referrels. That's a stupid rule' date=' it should be about where he is hit and whether the ball was going up for downwards..[/quote'] i am surprised they didnt take the angle of the ball, delivered with a round arm action, into account. it was clearly hitting, even if he was 2.5 metres down. doesnt matter now, but it was a big decision that turned out to be worth another 120 runs for england...

[retterimp]

what the hell is point of hawkeye if they arent going to belive it? it clearly showed the ball was hitting middle. might as well scrap all technology and go back to the 1950's, if they're going to be so subjective about it anyway, will save ICC a whole bunch of money

[Manny_Pacquiao]

He was out but in the end got benifit of doubt.

except there wasnt much doubt.

[NareshK]

I am still puzzled at why they didnt appeal those 2 times' date='how hard is it to go up in an appeal?[/quote'] Its probably one of the weirdest things I've seen. A batsman getting a knick and neither the bowler or the wicket keeper go up ? Not once but twice ? And its not as if India is playing before 30,000 noisy people for the first time. Every match in India has the same atmosphere and they dont have any trouble hearing the knicks. I'm also quite sure Strauss did get the knick because nothing else could have made that sound.

[ganeshran]

I dont understand this 2.5 meter rule one bit. So If a batsman decides to come forward 2.5 meters and bat, he can never be given lbw, as long as he remotely offers a shot?

[Sachinism]

Lost my voice celebrating the wicket, only to find out it was not out. at the ground we were clueless as to what happened, my phone battery was low, so had it switched off and had to switch it on to check cricinfo, which wouldn't load. had to end up messaging message my cousin in London to find out lol

[Ultimate_Game]

Till now I was in favor of UDRS but today I learnt why BCCI and Dhoni are against it. If the review system can't nail a straight-forward LBW where the replays clearly showed the ball hitting off & middle dead centre, can't really see why not go with Umpire's decision? In fact the decision was so clear that Bell had himself walked half-way to the pavilion!!! I say let the umpires make the decision and to hell with this half-baked review system. Btw I have yet to see India get one decision in their favor using the review system - including SL Test series a couple of years back and this world cup.

[VRV Singh]

I honestly had no idea this 2.5 metre thing was such an obstacle to getting something overturned. Well, it seems like today's umps took it as that anyway...plainly obvious that was castling middle stump. Common sense has to prevail, surely?

[Ultimate_Game]

Even the English commentators (Nasser & company) were baffled. The rule is that in case the batsman is hit 2.5 metres, it's up to the umpire's discretion and it was clear to all those who saw, including Bell, that the decision should have been out. Wasn't UDRS put in place to avoid these kind of decisions right? I think the system is idiotic - how can 3rd umpire simply provide a recommendation and it's still up to the umpire in the middle to decide whether the decision should be overruled or not? Do you think an umpire would be willing to admit his mistake and overrule his own decision, especially an umpire with as much ego as Billy Bowden who thinks crowd come to watch him umpire and not the game.

[asterix]

Even the English commentators (Nasser & company) were baffled. The rule is that in case the batsman is hit 2.5 metres' date=' it's up to the umpire's discretion and it was clear to all those who saw, including Bell, that the decision should have been out. Wasn't UDRS put in place to avoid these kind of decisions right? I think the system is idiotic - how can 3rd umpire simply provide a recommendation and it's still up to the umpire in the middle to decide whether the decision should be overruled or not? [b']Do you think an umpire would be willing to admit his mistake and overrule his own decision, especially an umpire with as much ego as Billy Bowden who thinks crowd come to watch him umpire and not the game.

THIS

[VRV Singh]

Also, why is it in this instance that India lose a review? Our challenge satisfied all the necessary criteria aside from this 2.5 metre bit, which seemingly no one was aware of and the umpires are meant to use as a guide rather than a rule anyway. That cannot be judged as an incorrect referral. At least give us our review back!

[Ultimate_Game]

Also, why is it in this instance that India lose a review? Our challenge satisfied all the necessary criteria aside from this 2.5 metre bit, which seemingly no one was aware of and the umpires are meant to use as a guide rather than a rule anyway. That cannot be judged as an incorrect referral. At least give us our review back!

That's the problem. There is a saying "Law is an ass" and sometimes you need common-sense to make it work, and sadly today the common-sense part was conspicuous by its absence. I have never seen an instance ever where the batsman was happy to walk off but the umpire called him back!!! Aren't umpires only supposed to intervene in case there's an disagreement? E.g., if we have a batsman walking off after edging the ball, a la Gilchrist, you don't see umpire calling the player back. So why wasn't the same philosophy followed here when Bell was walking off?

[asterix]

That's the problem. There is a saying "Law is an ass" and sometimes you need common-sense to make it work' date=' and sadly today the common-sense part was conspicuous by its absence. I have never seen an instance ever where the batsman was happy to walk off but the umpire called him back!!! Aren't umpires only supposed to intervene in case there's an disagreement? E.g., if we have a batsman walking off after edging the ball, a la Gilchrist, you don't see umpire calling the player back. So why wasn't the same philosophy followed here when Bell was walking off?[/quote'] One name.. Billy "Joker" Bowden...

[HowardRoark]

I dont understand this 2.5 meter rule one bit. So If a batsman decides to come forward 2.5 meters and bat' date=' he can never be given lbw, as long as he remotely offers a shot?[/quote'] No, it just means that the technology is not good enough to judge in that case and the umpire can judge what he thinks is the right decision based on the impression he got. It could be out or not out and UDRS cannot interfere in umpire's original decision. Today the replays showed that it was clearly out, so there was a chance for Billy Bowden to change his decision, but the egomaniac unfortunately stood by his faulty original decision.

[fineleg]

India could have won this easily if they have appealed when Strauss got the edge. infact this thing happened twice.

You see the Sri Lankans appeal when there is NO edge, you see the SA/Aus/Pak go up in appeal when there is a clear element of doubt, but our Kaptaan and bowlers don't appeal for genuine edges :dontknow: Crowd noise, this team must be used to the crowd noise! And can't Kirsten&co. send a message out after the first missed appeal for edge, so the bowler and keeper can be more alert for the next one at least! :eyedance: And regarding Ian Bell, billy goat can ..... off!!

[VRV Singh]

If they consistently apply this 2.5metre guide for referrals, only pea-rollers and full tosses will be successful..

[Ultimate_Game]

You see the Sri Lankans appeal when there is NO edge, you see the SA/Aus/Pak go up in appeal when there is a clear element of doubt, but our Kaptaan and bowlers don't appeal for genuine edges :dontknow: Crowd noise, this team must be used to the crowd noise! And regarding Ian Bell, billy goat can ..... off!!

Not appealing for a clear edge TWICE in the same game and against the SAME player (Strauss) is simply unheard of! Maybe Dhoni figured out early that Bowden won't be favoring them in the game :--D

[HowardRoark]

It's really puzzling - Chinnasamy stadium is not the loudest the country. We have had matches in other louder venues and always have our team hear and appeal for edges(even when there was zero deflection off the bat). How is the noise suddenly an issue now? I wish some journalist gets our team's POV on these missed appeals.

[fineleg]

^ Yes, I hope Dhoni gets asked some questions abt the TWICE missed appeals. And hope this is a wakeup call, so this is not repeated in other matches.

[Passion]

Ian bell was not out. I agree thread Hey my fellow members, Because of shortage of time, I will keep it simple. I fully support UDRS and my complain about UDRS is that why we didnt have UDRS before. Coming to Ian bell wicket. One must understand how UDRS works. Aim of UDRS to get rid of really bad decision and make the games more fair. Any sane cricketing mind will tell you that if some one is far down the pitch, it should not be given out. Because if you are far down the ground, then umpire can not judge where the ball will go after hitting the pad and benefit of doubt should go to batsman and UDRS ensures that. So if umpires has got any doubts about the trajectory of the ball if a batsman is far down the ground (more than 2.5 m), then he will give it not out. And UDRS will ensure that umpire original decision stands because benefit of doubt must go to batsman. Similarly if a batsman is far down the ground, but umpire is sure that ball is 100 percent hitting the stumps, umpire will give it out, and UDRS will enure umpire original decision stands. Now in the case of bell, umpire wasnt sure so he gave it not out and his original decision stood. If umpire had given it out then his original decision would have stood. We dont wanna see decisions where some one use his feet to come half way down the pitch, umpire gives it not out but UDRS gives it out and you guyz will start moaning about UDRS again. YOU CANT HAVE IT BOTH WAYS. Why is every one complaining about?. If there was no UDRS in worldcup, bell would have been not out anyway coz billly gave it not out. So unless you come up with suggestions to improve UDRS, i suggest not to poke your six foot long tongue in this matter. Thank you