4TH ASHES TEST: England v Australia at Chester-le-Street Aug 9-13, 2013

[Horrie Is God]

That should have been out. Umpire gave it out. DRS shows umpires call on LBW.

Thanks for clearing that up..

Definitely not out then..

 

[Meapro Ham]

If the scores were the other way around and England was batting and we copped that call I'd be the first one to say they got a call because they're losing.

That's because you're an idiot

 

[Marshall_magic]

But the umpire and rightly so gave him for caught behind.

If the bat wasn't there the original decision would have been not out and thus same decision

I understand, I guess with the DRS the ruling is that when the umpire gives it out they have to specify why, and only that call is challenged. If Rogers had been given his marching orders I don't think I could have complained, the umpire said he was out and video evidence couldn't conclusively prove otherwise. It was an interesting decision.

 

[Horrie Is God]

Can someone explain what happened as the commentators are talking drivel?

He was given out caught behind..not LBW..

So the umpires call on the LBW was not out & it stands..

 

[Marshall_magic]

Can someone explain what happened as the commentators are talking drivel?

Rogers given out caught behind. Reviewed the decision and hotspot showed it came off his pad. As a result they went to hawkeye and it showed umpires call for the LBW (which was out caught behind). The decision to give him out was overturned as he was not given out LBW.

 

[Alpha]

Can someone explain what happened as the commentators are talking drivel?

1) Broad to Rogers - Rogers plays and misses and ball flicks the back pad
2) England appeal for the caught behind
3) Given out by the on-field umpire
4) Rogers instantly reviews
5) Hot spot shows he missed and it flicked the back pad
6) They check for the LBW and it's flicking the top of off stump
7) Less than half the ball is hitting though
8) Therefore reverts to umpires call which he gave out for the caught behind but deemed the LBW not out
9) Due to this and less than half the ball hitting the stump Rogers was given not out

 

[BunniesMan]

Can someone explain what happened as the commentators are talking drivel?

Rogers given out. He challenges. DRS shows umpires call on LBW. Umpire gives him not out.

 

[Storm13]

He was given out caught behind..not LBW..

So the umpires call on the LBW was not out & it stands..

Fair enough but... How does the umpire know England were appealing caught behind over LBW, does the umpire then tell Rodgers that he has to appeal the decision of caught behind but... I think I"ve gone cross eyed, really starting to hate DRS

 

[Sans Souci Sainter]

Khawaja needs to score 80+ 2nd inns to keep his spot. He has had plenty of opportunity.

 

[Horrie Is God]

Fair enough but... How does the umpire know England were appealing caught behind over LBW, does the umpire then tell Rodgers that he has to appeal the decision of caught behind but... I think I"ve gone cross eyed, really starting to hate DRS

It doesn't matter what they were appealing for..

He ruled no LBW..& DRS said umpires call..so it stands..

 

[Alpha]

Fair enough but... How does the umpire know England were appealing caught behind over LBW, does the umpire then tell Rodgers that he has to appeal the decision of caught behind but... I think I"ve gone cross eyed, really starting to hate DRS

Like somebody said England simply appeal and it encompasses everything

It relates to umpires decision

 

[Storm13]

Like somebody said England simply appeal and it encompasses everything

It relates to umpires decision

Ok thanks I get it know :?

So just another question :roll: If the umpire didn't give it out originally for caught behind and England appealed would it still stand as not out?

 

[umina panther]

Hawkeye is way out that never would of hit the stumps anyway imo

 

[Meapro Ham]

The umpires call part of DRS is what's causing most of the problems. They should scrap that. Anything clipping the stumps on hawkeye should be not out, benefit of doubt to bstsman, regardless of umpires call. Same with an edge. No clear evidence of edge, not out. Forget umpires call. Would solve a lot of problems.

 

[umina panther]

Hahaha KP you wanker

 

[Alpha]

Ok thanks I get it know :?

So just another question :roll: If the umpire didn't give it out originally for caught behind and England appealed would it still stand as not out?

If the umpire gave it not out the decision would stand as not out.

Basically if less than half the ball is hitting the stumps on hawk eye it goes back to the umpires decision.

Umpire gives not out and is reviewed by bowling team

1) Less than half the ball is hitting - not out
2) More than half the ball is hitting - out

Umpire gives out and is reviewed by batting team

1) Less than half the ball is hitting - out
2) More than half the ball is hitting - out

 

[Storm13]

If the umpire gave it not out the decision would stand as not out. Basically if less than half the ball is hitting the stumps on hawk eye it goes back to the umpires decision.

Umpire gives not out and is reviewed by bowling team

1) Less than half the ball is hitting - not out
2) More than half the ball is hitting - out

Umpire gives out and is reviewed by batting team

1) Less than half the ball is hitting - out
2) More than half the ball is hitting - out

Cheers mate sorry for the stupid question's havn't been following cricket as I use too.

 

[Alpha]

Ffs

 

[BuffaloRules]

Broad is killing them.

 

[LeedsRhinos]

Cya later Clarkie, good to see the Australia batting we all know and love is back