MoJoJoJo
Tape Ball Star
- Joined
- May 12, 2017
- Runs
- 668
Looked out clearly as the bat hitting the pad. Will this decision prove to be a match turning one?
-
Contact the PP Team
[PICTURE] Should Virat Kohli have been given out?
- Thread starter MoJoJoJo
- Start date
Looked out clearly as the bat hitting the pad. Will this decision prove to be a match turning one?
- Joined
- Oct 2, 2004
- Runs
- 217,977
Well - seems some justice coming England's way later on!
MoJoJoJo
Tape Ball Star
- Joined
- May 12, 2017
- Runs
- 668
And Kohli out now. but is the damage already done?
Canford Cliffs
Local Club Star
- Joined
- Jul 22, 2018
- Runs
- 1,803
Rahane should have been not out as well in 1st innings (clear no ball) and India might have taken bigger lead in 1st innings
I think everyone here, including me, agrees that Kohli was out but the pics you have posted makes it ever more confusing. In the left pic, it looks like Kohli bat is way behind the pads but in the right pic it seems to be in line with the ball.
Sherlock
Test Debutant
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2010
- Runs
- 14,293
I don't know what else the 3rd umpire could have given. It was clearly not as definitive as is being made out, and the on-field umpire gave it not out too. They couldn't carry the footage forward because the 3rd umpire was as confused as everyone watching it. The bat was so close to the ball, and Kohli's bat was also hit his left pad.
It was a very difficult decision at that moment.
It was a very difficult decision at that moment.
bujhee kom
Local Club Star
- Joined
- Jun 7, 2017
- Runs
- 1,971
Have been watching this day intently. It was out. Hopefully such an error won't cost England the game.
It is Test cricket, still too soon.
Hasan123
Test Star
- Joined
- Mar 25, 2016
- Runs
- 38,432
Yes he should have been given out.
IMMY69
Senior T20I Player
- Joined
- Feb 18, 2005
- Runs
- 19,367
I have to disagree.
It was almost as if the third umpire didn’t even notice the bat hitting the pad and so didn’t even ask for a close up...
Having just seen it again on the highlights, I think it was a terrible decision.
Slog
Senior Test Player
- Joined
- Feb 15, 2015
- Runs
- 28,984
- Post of the Week
- 1
It was out
Major
Test Star
- Joined
- Aug 28, 2013
- Runs
- 36,172
- Post of the Week
- 7
no hotspot?
kingusama92
ODI Captain
- Joined
- Jan 9, 2008
- Runs
- 45,518
- Post of the Week
- 1
It's difficult.
Personal opinion is that it was out.
But the third umpire had to deem it "inconclusive" since the noise is there in sync with the bat. He can't start guessing as to where the noise came from.
Personal opinion is that it was out.
But the third umpire had to deem it "inconclusive" since the noise is there in sync with the bat. He can't start guessing as to where the noise came from.
Sherlock
Test Debutant
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2010
- Runs
- 14,293
The Googly
Tape Ball Star
- Joined
- Jul 20, 2016
- Runs
- 941
Clearly out. Awful umpiring.
The online umpiring was also rubbish. Highlighting how good Aleem Dar is.
The online umpiring was also rubbish. Highlighting how good Aleem Dar is.
How it was inconclusive? There was a visible distance in bat and ball.
James
World Star
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2006
- Runs
- 50,833
- Post of the Week
- 2
It was clearly out. The TV umpire didn’t look at it for long enough.
But no matter. We won
But no matter. We won
kingusama92
ODI Captain
- Joined
- Jan 9, 2008
- Runs
- 45,518
- Post of the Week
- 1
Dharmasena gave it not out.
Keeping that in mind, even a hint of doubt leaves it automatically inconclusive. Definitely would have been a point of contention if Dharmasena gave it out and Wilson overturned him on the basis of an assumed inside edge.
Certainly, a tough one where hotspot would have helped.
It was hardly clear, it seemed quite probable part of his heel was behind the line.
Last Monetarist
T20I Debutant
- Joined
- Mar 19, 2016
- Runs
- 7,910
Old school opinion, but benefit of the doubt should go to the batsman. Gut feeling is that Kohli was out, but the evidence wasn't conclusive enough to overturn the on-field decision.
RainMan_
Local Club Regular
- Joined
- Jan 18, 2018
- Runs
- 1,689
Not really sure why r we still talking about this topic. Onfield umpires had doubts in his mind which is why he gave it not out.
In order to overturn that decision, the third umpire needed conclusive evidence which the video footage failed to provide. Hence, he sticked with the onfield umpire's decision.
In order to overturn that decision, the third umpire needed conclusive evidence which the video footage failed to provide. Hence, he sticked with the onfield umpire's decision.
hadi123
Test Debutant
- Joined
- Oct 19, 2010
- Runs
- 15,247
- Post of the Week
- 1
It was out, the bat hit the pad which was the spike. Kohli himself was looking at the stumps afterwards, not the bat, so he knew himself he didn't hit it.
These types of calls are the reason I think DRS should never be with players, rather it's Umpire who should ask for clarification, if he is not sure.
I don't think 3rd Umpire had much option here - On filed Umpire gave him Not Out, therefore to over turn the decision 3rd Umpire had to be completely convinced. Also, I don't understand why they go through the full process - it might happen that main Umpire had given Not Out considering the ball had hit him out-side off or ball might be missing leg, and 3rd Umpire judged it Not Out on possible inside edge.
I don't think 3rd Umpire had much option here - On filed Umpire gave him Not Out, therefore to over turn the decision 3rd Umpire had to be completely convinced. Also, I don't understand why they go through the full process - it might happen that main Umpire had given Not Out considering the ball had hit him out-side off or ball might be missing leg, and 3rd Umpire judged it Not Out on possible inside edge.
This .
Process may have been a bit awry but ultimately the umpire didn't have enough conclusive evidence to overturn the on field decision
Similar threads
