Trichromatic Posted April 13, 2013 Share Posted April 13, 2013 To see if bat is grounded beyond the line or not for one. Not all angles are the same for obvious reasons. You can get better closeup with just the bat and the line from the side. From the front' date=' as you get closer, you will be focusing on the tip of the bat and not the entire bat.[/quote'] What? How would you be able to see the line front angle if bat has crossed the line? :blink: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raghav_12 Posted April 13, 2013 Share Posted April 13, 2013 What? How would you be able to see the line front angle if bat has crossed the line? :blink: he won't answer that :cantstop:. He'll go back to old argument that it doesn't happen. He is not doing any good for himself here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yoda Posted April 13, 2013 Share Posted April 13, 2013 What? How would you be able to see the line front angle if bat has crossed the line? :blink: I will use the side angle which is better for reasons stated above. :winky: Anyways I am done with this thread. All said and done it was a close call. One angle shows bat may have crossed the line but may be not be grounded beyond the line. Another indicates that bat may be just on the line although it is not the best angle to see if bat really crossed the line for which IMO side angle is better. The main issue here is that it was a close call and ump made his decision. There is no cheating from anyone, if anything a spectacular effort from the batsman to try and beat a direct hit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trichromatic Posted April 13, 2013 Share Posted April 13, 2013 I will use the side angle which is better for reasons stated above. :winky: Even when it's clear other angles provide conclusive evidence. All said and done it was a close call. It was clearly out. One angle shows bat may have crossed the line but may be not be grounded beyond the line when bails were halfway to the ground. That's the key part which you're ignoring. Another indicates that bat may be just on the line although it is not the best angle to see if bat really crossed the line for which IMO side angle is better. Yeah even if it's clearly shows that bat didn't cross the line when bails were off. :cantstop: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yoda Posted April 13, 2013 Share Posted April 13, 2013 Even when it's clear other angles provide conclusive evidence. It was clearly out. That's the key part which you're ignoring. Yeah even if it's clearly shows that bat didn't cross the line when bails were off. :cantstop: http://www.lords.org/laws-and-spirit/laws-of-cricket/laws/law-28-the-wicket-is-down,54,AR.html b) The disturbance of a bail, whether temporary or not, shall not constitute its complete removal from the top of the stumps Bails must be completely off from the top of the stumps. Are you sure they are in the front angle frame? One could argue that lack of another angle like the side one, the bails could have fallen back on top of the stumps. :P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trichromatic Posted April 13, 2013 Share Posted April 13, 2013 http://www.lords.org/laws-and-spirit/laws-of-cricket/laws/law-28-the-wicket-is-down' date=54,AR.html b) The disturbance of a bail, whether temporary or not, shall not constitute its complete removal from the top of the stumps Bails must be completely off from the top of the stumps. Are you sure they are in the front angle frame? :winky: :omg: Are you really questioning whether bails are completely off in this picture or not? What's wrong with you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old guy Posted April 13, 2013 Share Posted April 13, 2013 http://www.lords.org/laws-and-spirit/laws-of-cricket/laws/law-28-the-wicket-is-down' date=54,AR.html b) The disturbance of a bail, whether temporary or not, shall not constitute its complete removal from the top of the stumps Bails must be completely off from the top of the stumps. Are you sure they are in the front angle frame? One could argue that lack of another angle like the side one, the bails could have fallen back on top of the stumps. :P easily.. but if u cant then try seeing in fullscreen mode or something Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yoda Posted April 13, 2013 Share Posted April 13, 2013 :omg: Are you really questioning whether bails are completely off in this picture or not? What's wrong with you? They are still above the stumps, and rule says complete removal from above the stumps. :giggle: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old guy Posted April 13, 2013 Share Posted April 13, 2013 They are still above the stumps and rule says complete removal from above the stumps. :giggle: they are not! :omg: they are completely removed there is no contact with stump see the right bail its in the air! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trichromatic Posted April 13, 2013 Share Posted April 13, 2013 They are still above the stumps and rule says complete removal from above the stumps. :giggle: :hysterical::hysterical::hysterical: So, what should be distance between stumps and bails to qualify as complete removal? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yoda Posted April 13, 2013 Share Posted April 13, 2013 :hysterical::hysterical::hysterical: So, what should be distance between stumps and bails to qualify as complete removal? Ask the ICC. :winky: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old guy Posted April 13, 2013 Share Posted April 13, 2013 Ask the ICC. :winky: yar hadd ho gyi ab toh :hysterical: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yoda Posted April 13, 2013 Share Posted April 13, 2013 they are not! :omg: they are completely removed there is no contact with stump see the right bail its in the air! but they are still above and rule says they can't be above. :yay: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trichromatic Posted April 13, 2013 Share Posted April 13, 2013 they are not! :omg: they are completely removed there is no contact with stump see the right bail its in the air! Probably this is not best angle to check whether bails are in direct contact or not. :giggle: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old guy Posted April 13, 2013 Share Posted April 13, 2013 but they are still above and rule says they can't be above. :yay: :hysterical: :hysterical::hysterical::hysterical::hysterical: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trichromatic Posted April 13, 2013 Share Posted April 13, 2013 but they are still above and rule says they can't be above. :yay: Which part of the rules says that bails can't be completely in air to constitute run-out? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old guy Posted April 13, 2013 Share Posted April 13, 2013 Probably this is not best angle to check whether bails are in direct contact or not. :giggle: now he is just trolling :winky: u proved ur point thnx for sharing these images :icflove: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yoda Posted April 13, 2013 Share Posted April 13, 2013 I think we are back to my angle now. I told you guys. :hahaha: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old guy Posted April 13, 2013 Share Posted April 13, 2013 Which part of the rules says that? t(troll)cc rule book :nervous: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Posted April 13, 2013 Share Posted April 13, 2013 lol @ yoda:hysterical::hysterical::hysterical: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts