Australia v West Indies | 3rd Test | WACA, Perth | 16 - 20 December 2009

[moumotta]

surely the benefit of the doubt goes to the batsman?!

Benefit of doubt goes to umpire.

Not joking. Thats how the review system is desingned.

 

[161]

surely the benefit of the doubt goes to the batsman?!

The on field decision gets the benefit if there isnt sufficient evidence on replay.

 

[AZ]

from Cricinfo:

I've been flooded by emails saying that Roach should not have been given out because replays didn't show an edge. I don't think that's how it works. Bowden gave him out on the field and since replays did not prove that he didn't nick it, the on-field decision should stay. The irony is that, if Bowden had given him not out, and the Australians had appealed, Roach might well have been given not out after the review.

LOL!

 

[mumtaz]

What I don't get is how the replays can conclusively prove that it didn't hit the bat. If there is no edge seen in the replays, that means that the batsman didn't hit it, end of.

 

[chandulara]

Dougie is a big time cheat

he falsely claimed 2 bump catches in this match and 3rd umpire had to correct them

 

[moumotta]

from Cricinfo:

I've been flooded by emails saying that Roach should not have been given out because replays didn't show an edge. I don't think that's how it works. Bowden gave him out on the field and since replays did not prove that he didn't nick it, the on-field decision should stay. The irony is that, if Bowden had given him not out, and the Australians had appealed, Roach might well have been given not out after the review.

LOL!

Thats funny. What else did the replays needed to show that he did not nick it. Hot spot cleary showed he did not. Was there an uncertain snicko?

 

[Random Aussie]

Wow what a joke seriously.

Checking Aussie fans on the webs, have not seen a single one supporting that decision. Best comment so far "almost as big a farce as the last world cup final"

 

[Romali_rotti]

from Cricinfo:

I've been flooded by emails saying that Roach should not have been given out because replays didn't show an edge. I don't think that's how it works. Bowden gave him out on the field and since replays did not prove that he didn't nick it, the on-field decision should stay. The irony is that, if Bowden had given him not out, and the Australians had appealed, Roach might well have been given not out after the review.

LOL!

How the hell didnt the replay shows he didnt nick it ? This goose who sent this reply to cricinfo must be an aussie, the bat turned around another 90 odd degrees after the ball passed the bat and hot spot sill indiciating no contact....LOSERSSSSSSSSS

 

[AZ]

Thats funny. What else did the replays needed to show that he did not nick it. Hot spot cleary showed he did not. Was there an uncertain snicko?

apparently Snicko is not allowed in Review System

 

[Random Aussie]

Thats funny. What else did the replays needed to show that he did not nick it. Hot spot cleary showed he did not. Was there an uncertain snicko?

So the review system logically cannot work in this instance. Well done ICC )

 

[90MPH]

Gayle being very humble in defeat.

West Indies played very well after the first Test match thrashing. Hopefully this is a revival of some sorts for them.

 

[Romali_rotti]

lol The_Bunny at the front with Mark Taylor giving his expert analysis....Congrats on an another cheated WIN....

 

[AZ]

another gem from Cricinfo:

The irony is that, if Bowden had given him not out, and the Australians had asked for a review, Roach might well have been given not out after the review because replays didn't prove that he was out. It's complicated, this UDRS. I couldn't tell whether he nicked it or not.

LMFAO! Test cricket, Russian roulette-style! it's whoever calls it first, folks!

 

[tdigi]

This was common sense of a decision in my opinion. Got it wrong in the end. It really ruins the fun of a win.

 

[OZGOD]

It's a bit of a joke way to end the series eh. I don't think it was out either but the way the referrals work they can't overturn a decision unless there's strong evidence to the contrary. By strong evidence I think they mean that you can see a foot of air between the ball and bat. If the original decision had been not out, I doubt it would have been overturned because nothing shows that he hit it. It's Billy's fault!!

 

[OZGOD]

How the hell didnt the replay shows he didnt nick it ? This goose who sent this reply to cricinfo must be an aussie, the bat turned around another 90 odd degrees after the ball passed the bat and hot spot sill indiciating no contact....LOSERSSSSSSSSS

LOL Romali the commentator's actually Indian mate.

 

[moumotta]

I seriously doubt the ability of some 'first floor' umpires to interpret technology.

I remember seeing an instance where boundary skirting moved when fielder was in contact wiith the ball and the umpires failed to notice it ruling the bounday save as good.

 

[161]

well then .. snicko did show something ... was a very close call.

 

[ali_ed2006]

damn I feel sorry for the Windies..this was their match to win! well played though, nobody thought they would come this close after getting embarrassed in the first test.

 

[Geordie Ahmed]

What a farce

Not sure why some posters are having a go at the Aussies here - its the bloody system thats a joke and needs to be sorted out.

The video technology should be there to makt the CORRECT decision BUT as it stands its simply there to support the umpire - joke

I suspect this might be an ICC ploy to have video technology removed - get enough complaints and they will go back to the way it was - you know with the likes of England, Australia getting all the favourable decisions

 

[jatt799]

Asad Rauf U Sucks

 

[161]

Asad Rauf U Sucks

Rauf did what he was supposed to do.

 

[kingusama92]

The review system is fine. The laws behind it are farcical at best. Once it goes to the review system they should completely discard the on field call. Absolute BS to go back to the on field call when you can't tell if it's out or not. Batsman should get benefit of the doubt and that's the end of that.

Basically, what the current system does.. is back the on field umpire who made the wrong call. Absolutely pathetic.

 

[octavian]

Asad Rauf U Sucks

Rauf was right. Its the system that is to be blamed.

Under the Review System rules the benefit of the doubt goes to the umpire's decision and thats exactly what he did.

 

[octavian]

What a farce

Not sure why some posters are having a go at the Aussies here - its the bloody system thats a joke and needs to be sorted out.

The video technology should be there to makt the CORRECT decision BUT as it stands its simply there to support the umpire - joke

I suspect this might be an ICC ploy to have video technology removed - get enough complaints and they will go back to the way it was - you know with the likes of England, Australia getting all the favourable decisions

thats exactly what it seems like. I have the same feeling.

 

[Romali_rotti]

Asad Rauf U Sucks

No its not Asad Rauf's fault, Asad can only say what he sees on TV and suggest it to the on field umpire. Its upto the onfield umpire to make the final decision.......

 

[tdigi]

Basically, what the current system does.. is back the on field umpire who made the wrong call. Absolutely pathetic.

Indeed...you develop all this technology and the ICC can't make a simple interpretation of it. They better change the system.

 

[Romali_rotti]

LOL Romali the commentator's actually Indian mate.

Doesnt matter mate Crusade once again see's you through............

 

[Random Aussie]

Gayle man of the series. Well deserved.

 

[itduzz]

Gayle is gonna hammer the Aussies in the ODIs & 20/20s

 

[USaqaf]

Man this was a disgraceful finish to a great fightback.
I guess WI have themselves to blame to begin with being 9 down and all, but what fight , please Pak show some spine and DO NOT COLLAPSE just because your top order gets wiped out.
DO NOT SUCCUMB, SHOW FIGHT, THE AUSSIES WILL RETREAT.

 

[Extreme Pace]

How the people running such a giant organization ( ICC ) be such clowns ? The current review system is a joke, it doesn't work and it undermines the umpires.

 

[OZGOD]

Clearly the referral system needs some work. I reckon Rauf was told not to undermine the on field umpire lest Billy quit like Mark Benson.

 

[Afridi_Fan]

Review system can work so well for the betterment of game. But ICC has twisted it so much that it has begining to look ridiculous. Windies should have won this one.

 

[Random Aussie]

Review system can work so well for the betterment of game. But ICC has twisted it so much that it has begining to look ridiculous. Windies should have won this one.

Don't know if they would have won but I felt pretty cheated watching for the match to end like that. Farce.

 

[moumotta]

Don't know if they would have won but I felt pretty cheated watching for the match to end like that. Farce.

Entirely agree. There was no way WI were going to win. Not within realms of possibility but it was so good watching them inch closer and then the anti-climax ******* Billy .

 

[OZGOD]

Review system can work so well for the betterment of game. But ICC has twisted it so much that it has begining to look ridiculous. Windies should have won this one.

I don't think they would have won, they were playing really loosely but for Silly Billy and Bad Asad to end it with a shocker like that left a REALLY sour taste in the mouth. Personally, I reckon Billy wanted a day off.