[VIDEO/PICTURES] Was Azhar Ali given out incorrectly in the 2nd innings of the 3rd Test?

[MenInG]

Technology misuse or a great example?



Video of the Azhar Ali dismissal

<div style="width: 100%; height: 0px; position: relative; padding-bottom: 56.250%;"><iframe src="https://streamable.com/e/vqgz84" frameborder="0" width="100%" height="100%" allowfullscreen style="width: 100%; height: 100%; position: absolute;"></iframe></div>

 

[hoshiarpurexpress]

What do you think [MENTION=93712]MenInG[/MENTION]. Not sure if a video can be posted but there was a clear clear spike when ball was under/near the bat.
Clearly out.

 

[Mean&Green]

Not out 100% the spike is way too small in real time you can clearly tell bat is a long away from the ball

 

[MenInG]

What do you think [MENTION=93712]MenInG[/MENTION]. Not sure if a video can be posted but there was a clear clear spike when ball was under/near the bat.
Clearly out.

Only by science, I'd say out. But there were other spikes before that also

 

[Villager6964]

Umpire made a blunder it wasn't out.
But Azhar Ali is useless anyways.

 

[hoshiarpurexpress]

Only by science, I'd say out. But there were other spikes before that also

Okay fair enough. On live screen the umpire rolled forward the images front and back 3-4 times.
Whenever ball was under the bat.. very close there was a visible spike. So looked out to me personally.

 

[MenInG]

Video added to post #1

 

[hoshiarpurexpress]

There was a clear edge there. If you see the replay in slow motion, there is a deviation once the ball passes the bat. Also the spike in snicko is convincing, the wave before the ball reached the bat was a little low, once the ball was next to the bat the wave spiked a little more which means there was a faint nick for sure. It was a right decision, it was OUT.

 

[gazza619]

I don't think that was conclusive. There were tiny spikes on the spikometer (or whatever you call it) even before the ball reached near the bat.

 

[mmkextreme_1]

That decision of out against Azhar Ali IMO was not the correct call.

The on-field umpire gave it not out, there was not enough definitive proof to overturn that decision.

Extremely fazul umpiring.

 

[SpiritOf1903]

Exactly. There were murmurs and a little bigger one as the bat wafted over the ball.

 

[TheSultan]

He was out. Good use of technology. The timing of the faint spike and proximity to the bat made it clear.

 

[MenInG]

Good point by Mike Haysman - says there were spikes even before the ball hit the bat - it was inconclusive and not enough to be given out.

 

[Mamoon]

Not out 100% the spike is way too small in real time you can clearly tell bat is a long away from the ball

Only by science, I'd say out. But there were other spikes before that also

Umpire made a blunder it wasn't out.
But Azhar Ali is useless anyways.

I don't think that was conclusive. There were tiny spikes on the spikometer (or whatever you call it) even before the ball reached near the bat.

That decision of out against Azhar Ali IMO was not the correct call.

The on-field umpire gave it not out, there was not enough definitive proof to overturn that decision.

Extremely fazul umpiring.

It is laughable to suggest that he wasn’t out. The ball is CLEARLY in contact with the bat and and it is 100% conclusive. You don’t need even need ultra-edge to confirm this.

It is as obvious as getting your stumps shattered.

 

[Mamoon]

Good point by Mike Haysman - says there were spikes even before the ball hit the bat - it was inconclusive and not enough to be given out.

He needs to revisit his optician.

 

[muqarrab]

Ideal question for a undergrad signals and systems course...

 

[adzzy786]

View attachment 115428

It is laughable to suggest that he wasn’t out. The ball is CLEARLY in contact with the bat and and it is 100% conclusive. You don’t need even need ultra-edge to confirm this.

It is as obvious as getting your stumps shattered.

Have you seen that same frame from a different angle? It’s away from the bat. That angle is misleading

 

[WhenSultansBowled]

Line was NOT flat when ball was near the bat.

So that is OUT.

3rd umpire followed the rule book.

That said, it is valid to say that it wasn't conclusivel enough. But decision is correct.

 

[adzzy786]

Line was NOT flat when ball was near the bat.

So that is OUT.

3rd umpire followed the rule book.

That said, it is valid to say that it wasn't conclusivel enough. But decision is correct.

There were a lot of little movements on Ultraedge before the ball got to the bat similar to the little movements as the ball was passing the bat. There didn't look like a genuine difference in the movements on the sound wave between the two sequences and the third umpire didn't call it out as a spike until the sixth or seventh time looking at it

 

[Gilly]

The ultra edge seems conclusive to me, but most seem convinced that the ball deviated also, I have not seen a video slo mo after the ball passed the bat and hit the pads.

 

[Mamoon]

Have you seen that same frame from a different angle? It’s away from the bat. That angle is misleading

The other angle is misleading. This is a proper angle and picture is captured from an appropriate height.

This is literally the perfect angle for adjudging a decision like this and this is why the umpire made his call. The right call.

 

[Cricfan4eva]

It is definitely sharper when it is right beneath the bat than rest of the murmurs on snicko.

But it's one of those where if you're on the wrong end you feel hard done by.

 

[WhenSultansBowled]

There were a lot of little movements on Ultraedge before the ball got to the bat similar to the little movements as the ball was passing the bat. There didn't look like a genuine difference in the movements on the sound wave between the two sequences and the third umpire didn't call it out as a spike until the sixth or seventh time looking at it

I was watching it live.

If we take into consideration the spikes before the ball comes near the bat then we can argue it is not out. These spikes can be due to keeper or batter's boots etc.

But as the rule book says, afaik, the only thing umpire has to take into consideration is whether there is a spike when bat is near ball. In that case, it is out.

It was a solid decision by 3rd umpire.

In any case, tough luck for Azhar. This decision and that lbw where he gloved and didn't review.

 

[Sunzi]

Looked out to me.

 

[dravidthewall]

View attachment 115428

It is laughable to suggest that he wasn’t out. The ball is CLEARLY in contact with the bat and and it is 100% conclusive. You don’t need even need ultra-edge to confirm this.

It is as obvious as getting your stumps shattered.

Clear out ..There is spike when ball passes the bat.

 

[Civil]

It was out for me but very close.hard luck for us that time but Things even out one way or another... like Smith's previous drops.

 

[Mesozoic]

Are people like.... not seeing the clear spike when the ball is practically kissing the bat? Or are my eyes deceiving me?

 

[Amjid Javed]

View attachment 115428

It is laughable to suggest that he wasn’t out. The ball is CLEARLY in contact with the bat and and it is 100% conclusive. You don’t need even need ultra-edge to confirm this.

It is as obvious as getting your stumps shattered.

Its clearly out, a small under edge.

 

[MenInG]

Not happy our Azhar....

<div style="width: 100%; height: 0px; position: relative; padding-bottom: 50%;"><iframe src="https://streamable.com/e/3h9umq" frameborder="0" width="100%" height="100%" allowfullscreen style="width: 100%; height: 100%; position: absolute;"></iframe></div>

 

[Mamoon]

There was CLEAR contact between bat and ball and there was a CLEAR spike in ultra-edge when the ball and bat were in contact but somehow, the evidence is still not conclusive and it is a harsh decision.

Oh my

 

[Kaptan]

Did not watch in real time but judging by the above picture and video it looks out.

 

[Amjid Javed]

Not happy our Azhar....

<div style="width: 100%; height: 0px; position: relative; padding-bottom: 50%;"><iframe src="https://streamable.com/e/3h9umq" frameborder="0" width="100%" height="100%" allowfullscreen style="width: 100%; height: 100%; position: absolute;"></iframe></div>

1st time in his career hes shown aggression, why not show same intent with the bat.

 

[hoshiarpurexpress]

one more close one..

 

[hoshiarpurexpress]

There was CLEAR contact between bat and ball and there was a CLEAR spike in ultra-edge when the ball and bat were in contact but somehow, the evidence is still not conclusive and it is a harsh decision.

Oh my

yes. There was a clear spike.. a low one but it was clear.

 

[PakPremi]

Have you seen that same frame from a different angle? It’s away from the bat. That angle is misleading

Even in that image ots shadow that is touching the bat. Fact there were spikws before the ball got near the bat and the tiny spike could have been from any interference near the stump mic suggests third umpire hadno conclusive prood to over turn a not out decision.

 

[ask_analyse_act]

Probably the snicko didnt catch or work properly, but replay clearly shows that there is contact with the bat underneath..

He did underedged it for sure,

 

[NishanKonar]

This reminds me of Umar Akmal dismissal in the 2015 WC game against India

Very faint spike in snicko but given out by DRS. Umar walked off without complaining

 

[sweep_shot]

Benefit of doubt should've gone to batsman.

It should be not out. The spike was microscopic and it is not conclusive whether there was an edge.

 

[ask_analyse_act]

1st time in his career hes shown aggression, why not show same intent with the bat.

because his shot making skills are limited.. the normal and natural cricketing shot that comes naturally to every batsman is the drive forward and the leg side flick from the pads to square leg..

have you seen him play the leg glance or leg-side flick shot.. he hits it to the mid wicket region everyday...

 

[shamaan]

Definitely not out.

 

[moghul]

Technology misuse or a great example?

View attachment 115425View attachment 115426View attachment 115427

Video of the Azhar Ali dismissal

<div style="width: 100%; height: 0px; position: relative; padding-bottom: 56.250%;"><iframe src="https://streamable.com/e/vqgz84" frameborder="0" width="100%" height="100%" allowfullscreen style="width: 100%; height: 100%; position: absolute;"></iframe></div>

It was a clear out, don;t know what's the fuss about it.

 

[moghul]

Benefit of doubt should've gone to batsman.

It should be not out. The spike was microscopic and it is not conclusive whether there was an edge.

There was no doubt , you're blaming the technology ?

 

[sweep_shot]

There was no doubt , you're blaming the technology ?

Technology didn't show any major spike. It seemed like a flat line.

I am blaming the umpire who gave it out.

 

[moghul]

Technology didn't show any major spike. It seemed like a flat line.

I am blaming the umpire who gave it out.

Flat line ? I'm sure your eye site is OK, probably your TV reception was not good, there was a clear spike right at the time when ball hit his bat.

 

[Raja111]

looks Out to me as there is a clear spike and no gab between bat and ball.