Register a free account today to become a member of the world's largest Rugby League discussion forum! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
That hotspot was a mile away from the ball, and out of sync with snickers, which in turn spiked up when the ball was nowhere near bat or gloves... atrocious decision
Yeah it was a pretty poor decision.....Nowhere near the evidence needed to overturn the decision. Snicko "evidence" is a joke sometimes, they interpret any tiny little bump as an edge or a glove. There's nothing suggesting contact on hotspot and no appropriate noise, but they seem to want to give things out
Very bunker-esque of the third ump that one. The slightest bright dot about on the top glove, miles from the line of the ball, was the only thing remotely visible for mine. SFA on the bat or the bottom glove, certainly not anything that could be conclusively considered a brush from the ball. Given the onfield decision, that's a rough one. Oh well.