New Zealand vs Australia Test and ODI series

Started by PowerBug, January 22, 2016, 08:29:35 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

PowerBug

Quote from: Rusty00 on February 09, 2016, 05:05:48 PM
Quote from: PowerBug on February 09, 2016, 10:50:24 AM
You know you have until the bowler starts his run up for the next ball to lodge an appeal for the previous delivery. A few of the kiwi players appealed at the time, but when McCullum went to the umpire that could easily be considered as New Zealand's appeal for that wicket.

Despite the correct call being made, that's not how it should be made.
Particularly as the only reason McCullum went to the umpire is because he saw the replay on the big screen. If we are going to go down that path we may as well remove umpires altogether.
Basically turning it into the NFL there where the clubs have guys upstairs looking at replays to determine whether the coach should challenge the call made by the refs.
Leader of the King Karl Amon fan club
Coach of WXV side Rio De Janeiro Jaguars
2023 SC: Rank 126

GCSkiwi

Quote from: PowerBug on February 09, 2016, 11:34:40 PM
Quote from: Rusty00 on February 09, 2016, 05:05:48 PM
Quote from: PowerBug on February 09, 2016, 10:50:24 AM
You know you have until the bowler starts his run up for the next ball to lodge an appeal for the previous delivery. A few of the kiwi players appealed at the time, but when McCullum went to the umpire that could easily be considered as New Zealand's appeal for that wicket.

Despite the correct call being made, that's not how it should be made.
Particularly as the only reason McCullum went to the umpire is because he saw the replay on the big screen. If we are going to go down that path we may as well remove umpires altogether.
Basically turning it into the NFL there where the clubs have guys upstairs looking at replays to determine whether the coach should challenge the call made by the refs.

Given the name, I'm obviously a kiwi so take my opinion with a (winning) grain of salt. I think the whole incident was handled badly by just about everyone and will probably result in a review of how it's handled in future. Agreed that the replay factored in heavily to how things went but:

1) There was an appeal at the time, even if it was half-hearted. The umpire should have made a call and then it would have been up to us/Oz to review it depending on the call (most likely not out, so up to us to appeal). Given how the game was poised at the time, I reckon Baz would have had a chat with Henry and it would have come down to what Henry felt... And who knows how convinced he really was, I know there's been times I was playing that I felt someone was gone but you get no backup from the team and second guess yourself.

2) Did Marsh know he was out, and therefore could he have walked? (I know this is a controversial things these days and that we're talking professional cricket here). He was clearly pissed off at how it was done but ultimately the call was correct, he was out. There's been a lot of talk about our spirit of the game in how the appeal was made, but honestly if we're going purely off "spirit of the game" then the answer would have been for Marsh to say "honestly I don't know, it definitely hit my foot and I dunno if it collected some ground", and then the umps could have made their own decision to refer or not.

3) I agree the replay should not have been shown until at least after the next ball when the issue was moot, I suspect this will change officially. That way the above process would need to have happened in some way.

4) The point of the umpires is to officiate the game and the point of 3rd umpire referral is to make sure the right call is made. Where is the line drawn? I wouldn't want every decision to be referred to the 3rd ump but in this instance it happened so quick that no-one knew what had happened properly. Surely that's a time that a slow-mo version should be used?

Ringo

Quote from: GCSkiwi on February 10, 2016, 11:56:37 AM
Quote from: PowerBug on February 09, 2016, 11:34:40 PM
Quote from: Rusty00 on February 09, 2016, 05:05:48 PM
Quote from: PowerBug on February 09, 2016, 10:50:24 AM
You know you have until the bowler starts his run up for the next ball to lodge an appeal for the previous delivery. A few of the kiwi players appealed at the time, but when McCullum went to the umpire that could easily be considered as New Zealand's appeal for that wicket.

Despite the correct call being made, that's not how it should be made.
Particularly as the only reason McCullum went to the umpire is because he saw the replay on the big screen. If we are going to go down that path we may as well remove umpires altogether.
Basically turning it into the NFL there where the clubs have guys upstairs looking at replays to determine whether the coach should challenge the call made by the refs.

Given the name, I'm obviously a kiwi so take my opinion with a (winning) grain of salt. I think the whole incident was handled badly by just about everyone and will probably result in a review of how it's handled in future. Agreed that the replay factored in heavily to how things went but:

1) There was an appeal at the time, even if it was half-hearted. The umpire should have made a call and then it would have been up to us/Oz to review it depending on the call (most likely not out, so up to us to appeal). Given how the game was poised at the time, I reckon Baz would have had a chat with Henry and it would have come down to what Henry felt... And who knows how convinced he really was, I know there's been times I was playing that I felt someone was gone but you get no backup from the team and second guess yourself.

2) Did Marsh know he was out, and therefore could he have walked? (I know this is a controversial things these days and that we're talking professional cricket here). He was clearly pissed off at how it was done but ultimately the call was correct, he was out. There's been a lot of talk about our spirit of the game in how the appeal was made, but honestly if we're going purely off "spirit of the game" then the answer would have been for Marsh to say "honestly I don't know, it definitely hit my foot and I dunno if it collected some ground", and then the umps could have made their own decision to refer or not.

3) I agree the replay should not have been shown until at least after the next ball when the issue was moot, I suspect this will change officially. That way the above process would need to have happened in some way.

4) The point of the umpires is to officiate the game and the point of 3rd umpire referral is to make sure the right call is made. Where is the line drawn? I wouldn't want every decision to be referred to the 3rd ump but in this instance it happened so quick that no-one knew what had happened properly. Surely that's a time that a slow-mo version should be used?
Agree 100% Kiwi.  badly handled.
Umps should have made the decision straight away on the appeal and then up to Captain to refer.

And agree replays should not be shown till decision has been made as this is probably the contentious point and reckon may change.


Capper

Patto out, Bird in

Australia: Joe Burns, David Warner, Usman Khawaja, Steve Smith (capt), Adam Voges, Mitch Marsh, Peter Nevill, Peter Siddle, Josh Hazlewood, Nathan Lyon, Jackson Bird.
New Zealand: Martin Guptill, Tom Latham, Kane Williamson, Henry Nicholls, Brendon McCullum (capt), Corey Anderson, BJ Watling, Mark Craig, Doug Bracewell, Tim Southee, Trent Boult

Bill Manspeaker

McCullum 100th straight test. unbelievable effort

Aussies won the toss and elected to bowl. god damn early start. can't imagine living in WA for this

Bill Manspeaker

you flowerin beauty! what a catch

massive wicket. NZ in a bit of trouble

Capper


Ringo

Although excited not overconfident as they say need to see after both teams have completed an innings.  Ball is swinging and really wary of NZ attack who will use it well and we know what happened in the Ashes with the swinging ball.

Ringo

Gee Bird really needs to get his act together.  Half NZ runs have come from his bowling including 7 fours.

Bill Manspeaker


Ringo

That DRS what a BS and probably one of the reasons why India are against it.  Referred because umpire originally thought it hit bat before ball.  DRS proved hit pad first but remained with umpires call because only 25% of ball was hitting stumps and as umpire had said not out remained that way. Watling a very lucky man.

Jukes

Imagine Broad vs Aus on this pitch! Aus probably wouldn't even make it into double digits

Bill Manspeaker

ball smashes into the stumps. bails didn't drop. unreal

Bill Manspeaker


Capper

Quote from: Jukes on February 12, 2016, 11:39:51 AM
Imagine Broad vs Aus on this pitch! Aus probably wouldn't even make it into double digits
Broad with the new ball would knock over any team on that pitch in those conditions