vvvslaxman Posted March 31, 2011 Posted March 31, 2011 Looked as good as plumb but the angle good be questioned. This is probably the first time in 20 years when Sachin gave so many chances to be dismissed. Lucky he was and his score is what took India to a comfortable position, and awfully unlucky and bad we were on the field. You should be happy you didn't give that many chances to Viru today. :cantstop: . It would have been absolute mayhem.
b555 Posted March 31, 2011 Posted March 31, 2011 man the way sachin said , he thought it was gonnamiss leg stump u donno the way we were shouting after it was given not out lost my voice for 10 min der, shouted so fiercely
Ramzz Posted March 31, 2011 Posted March 31, 2011 I don't know if anyone noticed but GG did not seem too keen on the review but Sachin was reasonably sure that it going down leg, which he indicated to gambo via a gesture. Another thing...look at Kamran moving down leg...that is a good indication. Sachin knew he was a bit forward so the ball did have to travel a fair distance.
lonestarranger Posted March 31, 2011 Posted March 31, 2011 Bug fixed if (Batsman == Tendulkar ) { if ( Paakis == BowlingTeam) { screwbowlingteam == True ; } } There's still a mistake in the syntax.. :cantstop:
rkt.india Posted March 31, 2011 Posted March 31, 2011 I very much liked that UDRS gave a life to Sachin today and not saying that Sachin should have been given out there. But how many of us think that' date=' this case warranted an overturning through UDRS? IMHO, If you consider spirit of UDRS, this overturning was against that.[/quote'] it was not hitting the stumps in hawk eye prediction so how it was against....if it had clipped a millimeter than it would have not been turned...and u need consider Ajmal was not a seamer..he is a spinner who can turn the ball a long way...and the ball was turning sharply on that wicket..look at how Yuvi was turning it even with less revolutions and rip...
glogirl Posted March 31, 2011 Posted March 31, 2011 when they asked for the referral i was thinking why should they ask for the referral and waste as it looked clearly out to me in replay. but surprised when the ball missed the leg stump, hmmm at least this time the URDS was in favour for us.
jhakati Posted March 31, 2011 Posted March 31, 2011 Real time and in replays it looked out to me.. The udrs showed the ball barely missing.. It worked to our advantage but to me it was a clear example of how uncertain the prediction system is.. Do u guys agree? dunno y everyone is making an issue out of this my personal feeling even in real time was the ball was sliding down the leg and hawk eye confirmed it not sure y the commentators were being so pro paki and criticizing UDRS
mahen Posted March 31, 2011 Posted March 31, 2011 who cares? India wins and are now 1 victory away from the World Cup
Raghav_12 Posted March 31, 2011 Posted March 31, 2011 it was not hitting the stumps in hawk eye prediction so how it was against....if it had clipped a millimeter than it would have not been turned...and u need consider Ajmal was not a seamer..he is a spinner who can turn the ball a long way...and the ball was turning sharply on that wicket..look at how Yuvi was turning it even with less revolutions and rip... rkt, if I had to give my decision first hand, as in capacity of third umpire, having replay of the shout and hawk-eye prediction at my disposal, I would have given not out. But as stated purpose of UDRS is to avoid howlers and accordingly video evidences should be adequately strong to overturn a decision. In this case, considering accuracy factor of hawk-eye I would say video evidence was not strong enough. Ball was shown to be missing leg stump hardly and if given out, it was not going to be a howler. You have to consider the fact that when you overturn ground umpires decision that amounts to telling umpire that "man you made a big mistake which should be corrected". Ian Gould's expression on reversal of decision told same thing. Problem was not with how the case was handled yesterday. As per rules defined by ICC Sachin should have been not out and exactly that happened. Problem lies with ICC rules where rule makers seem to be confused about basic purpose of UDRS.
kabira Posted March 31, 2011 Posted March 31, 2011 I was surprised he gave him out as in real time I thought it was sliding down the leg side, you can see wicket keeper moving to the leg side. and ball turning sharply.
kabira Posted March 31, 2011 Posted March 31, 2011 rkt, if I had to give my decision first hand, as in capacity of third umpire, having replay of the shout and hawk-eye prediction at my disposal, I would have given not out. But as stated purpose of UDRS is to avoid howlers and accordingly video evidences should be adequately strong to overturn a decision. In this case, considering accuracy factor of hawk-eye I would say video evidence was not strong enough. Ball was shown to be missing leg stump hardly and if given out, it was not going to be a howler. You have to consider the fact that when you overturn ground umpires decision that amounts to telling umpire that "man you made a big mistake which should be corrected". Ian Gould's expression on reversal of decision told same thing. Problem was not with how the case was handled yesterday. As per rules defined by ICC Sachin should have been not out and exactly that happened. Problem lies with ICC rules where rule makers seem to be confused about basic purpose of UDRS. No it was not marginal at all. It was howler, because umpire thought Ajmal bowled straight one, if he had bowled off spinner, no way in the world that would have hit the stumps. So yes that was howler. I don't understand the need for this thread.
akshayxyz Posted March 31, 2011 Posted March 31, 2011 First things first - UDRS is a process and H/E was the technology used. What MTC said ++ - Why would some one introduce manual override in the technology!!! It was marginal case, ball was missing by couple of millimeters at max. It could have gone either way. There is no way any human umpire with all the video replays in the world would have been able to tell with 100% confidence whether it is a millimeter here or there. Was this any more unlikely than many of other incidents we have witnessed in the past - like Amla's dismissal in QF, when ball went through the stumps w/o taking the bails, ball hitting the stumps w/o taking the bails.. and what not. Just accept that - it was Sachin's lucky day, luckiest one in his 21 years. 5 more dropped chances further substantiated that, what more you want?
Zap_Brannigan Posted March 31, 2011 Posted March 31, 2011 Going down leg...called it the 1st time i saw it. Even Sachin said that to Ghambir before referring it. I actually thought he was stumped out the next ball but thankfully he didnt lift his backfoot a lot and had time to get back in.
Lord Posted March 31, 2011 Posted March 31, 2011 Sehwag looked not out too then with the angle.why nobody talking about it
daryl1985 Posted March 31, 2011 Posted March 31, 2011 Well done to those who thought it was going down leg. I thought he was plumb and was 100% sure he was gone. If i was Pakistani i genuinely believe that i would have felt that this decision was a fix. I was that sure it was LBW.
Zap_Brannigan Posted March 31, 2011 Posted March 31, 2011 Well done to those who thought it was going down leg. I thought he was plumb and was 100% sure he was gone. If i was Pakistani i genuinely believe that i would have felt that this decision was a fix. I was that sure it was LBW. Thats because if you were a paki, you would have been a conspiracy theorist.
NareshK Posted March 31, 2011 Posted March 31, 2011 It comfortably missed the stumps. He was actually quite forward and you can see Sachin telling Gambhir that he was confident about the ball going down. Good decision by UDRS.
Lord Posted March 31, 2011 Posted March 31, 2011 too me it looked marginal.thought Sachin wont even reviwe it like Sehwag didnt.but it worked. it was excellent use of UDRS though.thats how it should be,barring howlers,keep ur refferals for marginal decisions for two best bats,Sachin n Yuvraj,n two best bowlers,Zak and ..... Yuvraj:--D
NareshK Posted March 31, 2011 Posted March 31, 2011 Thats because if you were a paki' date=' you would have been a conspiracy theorist.[/quote'] Those morons are already at it in the Pakistan forum. They think someone fixed the UDRS to give Sachin not out. :haha: So they also fixed the fielders to drop the catches and also made their batsmen get out so India could win the match and reach the final ? Sore losers all of them. Pakis have a long way to go before they can be gracious in defeat.
Karan114 Posted March 31, 2011 Posted March 31, 2011 Those morons are already at it in the Pakistan forum. They think someone fixed the UDRS to give Sachin not out. :haha: So they also fixed the fielders to drop the catches and also made their batsmen get out so India could win the match and reach the final ? Sore losers all of them. Pakis have a long way to go before they can be gracious in defeat. Oh that's nothing...the widespread claim is that their prime minister fixed it to ensure more IPL contracts and bilateral series...they are the sixth ranked team in the world, they don't have a single international standard batsman but it always HAS to be fixing involved, the mighty Pakistani team can never lose because it just isn't good enough.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now