Cheating third umpire

[Dayman]

Obvious spot of white on the bat. Hats off to Dravid, but he was out. (And he knew it)

[Guest Gunner]

That wasn't a nick, it was an existing patch on the bat. A nick that big wouldn't have been missed by the on field umpire. he didn't nick it, that decision was wrong.

[Bumper]

I reckon there is a hotspot right up your rear. Oh wait, get your head out!

[urbestfriend]

Obvious spot of white on the bat. Hats off to Dravid' date=' but he was out. (And he knew it)[/quote'] Abe this spot is no where near the ball passed the bat!

[jaggadaku]

The spot was there all along. It was a pathetic decision by the umpire

[Guest Gunner]

Obvious spot of white on the bat. Hats off to Dravid' date=' but he was out. (And he knew it)[/quote'] Dude, are you stupid?

[Blue Panther]

It will interesting to listen it with the snicko meter.

[Ravi.]

****ing umpire is helping England in every possible way.

[ganeshran]

Pathetic decision by the third umpire. DRS :fail:

[Params7]

My bad if it was there before didn't see that. Horrible decision.

[Trichromatic]

Whatever argument is given about the decision, no one can be sure that he nicked it. Benefit of doubt always goes to batsman. In this case there was not enough evidence to change the decision of umpire.

[Trichromatic]

For those saying why DRS is being used' date=' the better question to ask is where's the evidence that Dravid knicked it? There's no evidence so far...well atleast not concrete evidence :giggle:[/quote'] Technology didn't fail in this case. It was a human mistake. Ravi and Sunny started doing their work for BCCI just after the decision saying that's why BCCI doesn't want UDRS. :giggle:

[urbestfriend]

They are claiming snicko is inconclusive due to too much background noise...:WTF: Is it because it wasn't showing any evidence???

[Gotham Cronie]

Vindicates India's stand all along. DRS system is flawed and as for "spirit of the game" there's no such thing.

This isn't the DRS system's fault. The DRS system it can only be overturned if there's is overwhelming evidence. It should have remained not-out. Even if someone thinks there was a nick, there is not overwhelming evidence. It's the implementation of the DRS that is the problem.

[urbestfriend]

Technology didn't fail in this case. It was a human mistake. Ravi and Sunny started doing their work for BCCI just after the decision saying that's why BCCI doesn't want UDRS. :giggle:

Whats the point of using technology if such tools are making those decisions?

[Trichromatic]

Whats the point of using technology if such tools are making those decisions?

Would you say same for Raina's decision? Stop reviewing of stump out calls?

[jaggadaku]

This isn't the DRS system's fault. The DRS system it can only be overturned if there's is overwhelming evidence. It should have remained not-out. Even if someone thinks there was a nick, there is not overwhelming evidence. It's the implementation of the DRS that is the problem.

I agree it wasn't DRS system fault but It was the third umpire who failed

[Lord]

Ganguly n Bumble trying to justify the decision,clutching at straws:mad:

[Ultimate_Game]

This isn't the DRS system's fault. The DRS system it can only be overturned if there's is overwhelming evidence. It should have remained not-out. Even if someone thinks there was a nick, there is not overwhelming evidence. It's the implementation of the DRS that is the problem.

Either way BCCI's stand is vindicated. Firstly the technology is inconclusive as snickometer or Hot Spot are not reliable and are prone to errors. Secondly, the whole point of DRS is supposed to correct the obvious errors/mistakes like the sort of blunders made by Bucknor in the past. This decision simply enforces the point the system is not ready yet as it failed on both counts. Would love to hear what ICC's thoughts are on the system now.

[urbestfriend]

Would you say same for Raina's decision? Stop reviewing of stump out calls?

No, I am always in favor of technology but these pathetic umpires shouldn't be making any decisions and there should be consistency across all games. It is not on, if you start reversing a decision even if there is no evidence. If you have inconclusive evidence, benifit should go to batsman.