Hats off Mohmmad Amir!!

[tweaker]

Virat is very found of Amir

[zen]

It appears as if some folks think that if the ball is shown to hitting some part of the stumps on Hawkeye, it is out.

To even start speculating, at least 50% of the ball should be shown hitting either the bails or leg/off stump.

In Kohli's case, hardly 10% to 20% of the ball was shown to be clipping the bails. That is NOT OUT and NOT even subject to speculation.

[CG]

He bowled well but if nehra looked like akram on the pitch its not much to go on.

[Asim]

In live action, Virat one looked way more plumb than Rohit or previous dismissal... Couldv easily been given Out and was still be called a good-decision but thats very much a part of game, Rohit one cud'v stayed N.O then. Virat was lucky surviving that however after that it was brilliant come-back from him... Many r saying it was over if that was given but I do not agree, total was too low to defend and ind got loong batting-lineup but yes match was going to be much closer then...

[Riddle]

It was the pitch. Amir is still a rubbish bowler on flatter tracks.

[Sean Bradley]

Mohammed Amir is good but not the best in the world. A but overrated in my opinion.

[rkt.india]

It appears as if some folks think that if the ball is shown to hitting some part of the stumps on Hawkeye, it is out.

To even start speculating, at least 50% of the ball should be shown hitting either the bails or leg/off stump.

In Kohli's case, hardly 10% to 20% of the ball was shown to be clipping the bails. That is NOT OUT and NOT even subject to speculation.

if umpire had given it out, no one would have complained. Neither DRS would have overturned it. So, it was a 50-50 decision which went in Kohli's favor.

[zen]

if umpire had given it out, no one would have complained. Neither DRS would have overturned it. So, it was a 50-50 decision which went in Kohli's favor.

On Hawkeye, If less than 50% of the ball is clipping the bails (or the side of leg or off stump), it is benefit of doubt to the batsmen so not out

 

Edited March 1, 2016 by rett

[BlueBee]

On Hawkeye, If less than 50% of the ball is clipping the bails (or the side of leg or off stump), it is benefit of doubt to the batsmen so not out

 

In that case the umpire's decision stands.

[rkt.india]

On Hawkeye, If less than 50% of the ball is clipping the bails (or the side of leg or off stump), it is benefit of doubt to the batsmen so not out

 

but if umpire had given it out, it was out on DRS too.

[zen]

 

In that case the umpire's decision stands.

In that case, they should change the rule to not out 

[zen]

but if umpire had given it out, it was out on DRS too.

Are they using DRS in Asia Cup? I have not seen any decisions being referred. 

If the umpire had given that out, it would be somewhat similar to someone given LBW despite the bowl pitching marginally outside leg. And in fact Kohli was given out when it appeared that he could have nicked the ball on to the pads 

Edited March 1, 2016 by rett

[Shivaji bhonsle]

but if umpire had given it out, it was out on DRS too.

He was standing outside the crease. No way you can give that out.

[express bowling]

A 50;50 decision for Kohli......given not out by the umpire...I don't see any problem with it.

A valid not out this one.  

[moniker]

Are they using DRS in Asia Cup? I have not seen any decisions being referred. 

If the umpire had given that out, it would be somewhat similar to someone given LBW despite the bowl pitching marginally outside leg. And in fact Kohli was given out when it appeared that he could have nicked the ball on to the pads 

No, not comparable. Identifying whether ball pitched outside leg or not can be accurately done by the current available technology. Hawk eye is just a prediction and hitting 50% of a stump means it is not a howler. DRS should ideally be used only to overturn obvious howlers. So in this case going back to the on field umpire's decision makes more sense.

[zen]

 

No, not comparable. Identifying whether ball pitched outside leg or not can be accurately done by the current available technology. Hawk eye is just a prediction and hitting 50% of a stump means it is not a howler. DRS should ideally be used only to overturn obvious howlers. So in this case going back to the on field umpire's decision makes more sense.

What I implied was that Kohli was not out. For me 50% or more of the ball should be hitting the bails to speculate. If umpire had given that out - it would be somewhat be similar to some of the bad decisions mentioned. Note that there is no DRS in Asia Cup 

Coming back to what you wrote, I wrote about 50% of the ball hitting the bails (or the outside of off or leg stump) and not hitting 50% of the stump. So if 50% or more of the ball is not hitting the bails (or the outside of leg or off stump), DRS should give benefit of doubt to the batsman, IMO 

 

Edited March 1, 2016 by rett

[rkt.india]

 

He was standing outside the crease. No way you can give that out.

Ii would have been disappointed if that decision was against us.

What I implied was that Kohli was not out. For me 50% or more of the ball should be hitting the bails to speculate. If umpire had given that out - it would be somewhat be similar to some of the bad decisions mentioned. Note that there is no DRS in Asia Cup 

Coming back to what you wrote, I wrote about 50% of the ball hitting the bails (or the outside of off or leg stump) and not hitting 50% of the stump. So if 50% or more of the ball is not hitting the bails (or the outside of leg or off stump), DRS should give benefit of doubt to the batsman, IMO 

 

It would not have been a bad decision if umpire had given it out.

[express bowling]

Ii would have been disappointed if that decision was against us.

It would not have been a bad decision if umpire had given it out.

What happened to benefit of doubt goes to the batsman ?

[rkt.india]

What happened to benefit of doubt goes to the batsman ?

Benefit of doubt certainly went to the batsman, but I am only saying that it would not have been a bad decision even if was given out.

Edited March 1, 2016 by rkt.india

[express bowling]

Benefit of doubt certainly went to the batsman, but I am only saying that it would not have been a bad decision even if was given out.

If  it  is  50:50 decision then a doubt is certainly there. 

Classically, the only decision in that case should be not out....as the benefit of doubt goes to the batsman.

Many umpires these days don't seem to follow this age old adage though.

Edited March 1, 2016 by express bowling