Doesn't matter if technology shows someone is out or not out. If the 3rd umpire believes he is sure based on what he sees someone is out, he can rule them out.
The Umpires call is no longer a part of the DRS.
So its a conclusive evidence as per 3rd umpire, fox should present it .otherwise it's implied umpire got creativeSimon Taufel from Channel 7 if wanted: "In my view the decision was out. The third umpire did make the correct decision in the end. With the technology protocols, we do have a hierarchy of redundancy and when the umpire sees a clear deflection off the bat there is no need to go any further and use any other form of technology to prove the case. The clear deflection is conclusive evidence. In this particular case what we have seen from the third umpire, is they've used a secondary form of technology, which for whatever reason hasn't shown the same conclusive evidence of audio to back up the clear deflection. In the end the third umpire did the right thing and went back to the clear deflection and overturned the umpire field. So, in my view correct decision made."
Good umpiring
Exactly this. Who is this umpire? What is his credential?
your behavior actually shows what slum you come out from bloody piece of ****
If on field umpire decision was out than we have no problem because there is no clear evidence to overturn the decision .
Wow man another great decision by the third umpire
Lol some hilarious decisions by the third umpire wrt consistency
Snicko showed a spike when there was no deflection. You have to decide which decision was wrong. Jaiswal or Akash
Yes a sellout country's umpire decision .
He did use technology though. Does the rule book says snicko is to be considered superior to all other evidence? It doesn't.
Shame awareness?
Thank you. I thought I was the only one being stupid.
He has already sellout so why expect anything different other than out.
Ok what happened in Akash’s decision then?
Because he was clearly out? Lol
Talking about Akash Deep, there was deflection ..are you saying Akash was out and no deflection was there?
I'm not sure I'm following you here. Akash was clearly out too. Why shouldn't he be given out?
there was clear deflection as the ball passed glove. Snicko somehow missed it.
There was deflection..it wasn’t out snicko didnt pick.
Shorfuddoula has been a decent umpire on and off the fieldYes he has done a fantastic job so far
Which dismissal you talking about now?
I beg to differ. Both decisions were excellent.
Akash.. Either the umpire should had given Jaiswal not out and Akash out , or Akash not out and Jaiswal out due to the logic of snicko..
Bro they just showed a zoomed in image of the edge leaving a mark. Both decisions were correct.
They should show it before that delivery red mark was not existed.from when onwards red marks became technical standard to given out
Literally just showed a red mark left on Akashs bat for the edge. Both were clearly out.
No one has any answer
No I am not desperate for India to lose
Common sense prevailing in such situations makes sense. The correct decision was made despite technology failing.
if naked eye doesnt conclude the fact then technology comes inNo one has any answer
I wonder why Kohli didn't review that edge to first slip. Perhaps the snicko might not have picked up the edge and hence decision could have been overturned?
Robbed what? He gloved that ball clearly.
