World Cup Quarter Finals Discussion

[PokerAce]

^ For instance not going back too far, I would love to hear the Audio on the Akmal DRS ct behind review over-rule against India.

Just why did the umpire feel he could over-rule, without there being any real spike on Snicko.

 

[PokerAce]

Hmm ... interesting turn of events here.

 

[ParkedTheBus]

Please don't get me wrong here, but you'd be blind if you don't see the fact that 90% of the 50-50 decisions are going India's way in the major ICC tournaments. Of course, India were very well placed when Rohit should have been given out, but this has been happening since probably the 11 World Cup.

 

[LiveLoveABD]

Just love Wahab Riaz's spirit and fight!! With the bat, ball or in the field!

 

[LiveLoveABD]

Please don't get me wrong here, but you'd be blind if you don't see the fact that 90% of the 50-50 decisions are going India's way in the major ICC tournaments. Of course, India were very well placed when Rohit should have been given out, but this has been happening since probably the 11 World Cup.

I'm trying hard not to get you wrong, but that's a really stupid post. They've simply used their reviews judiciously and they've got one or two decisions going their way like any other team.

 

[grkrama]

90% of the 50-50 decisions are going India's way in the major ICC tournaments

wow mate can you give me some source for those stats

 

[PokerAce]

Please don't get me wrong here, but you'd be blind if you don't see the fact that 90% of the 50-50 decisions are going India's way in the major ICC tournaments. Of course, India were very well placed when Rohit should have been given out, but this has been happening since probably the 11 World Cup.

I am sorry but 90% of 50-50 decisions !!

I think my human brain is incapable of comprehending this statistic. Did someone ever tell you that you cannot win 50-50 decisions 90% of the times !! Its 50-50, the whole point of naming them 50-50 decisions is that they are decisions you will win half the times and lose the other half of the times. Or else they would be called 90-10 decisions. BTW did someone tell you that 96% of stats are just made up.

Jokes apart, as for the Rohit decision, BD had used up their review, you want to blame India for that go ahead.

 

[MattW]

They still check for a front-foot no ball without the team needing a review in hand. Why should a height no ball be different?

 

[PokerAce]

Wow whr was this aggressive Pakistan against India. That catch drop was mental, but I am loving this attitude from the Pak bowlers.

 

[PokerAce]

They still check for a front-foot no ball without the team needing a review in hand. Why should a height no ball be different?

Who said it should be different.

I agree that it was not a no ball, and common sense should have prevailed there and the Ump should have checked the replay before ruling on it. Also unlike what one of the posters said above, India weren't that well placed at the time, and Rohit being given out would have been the difference between 270 and 300 that India got.

However as it turns out, the Ump didn't look at the replay and gave it a no ball ... and BD should have been able to do something about it had they got a review up their sleeve.

Now if BD had already used up the review, do you really want to blame India for that?

 

[grkrama]

Why should a height no ball be different?

It shouldnt be if not its more rare for waist high no ball wickts that it would make sense to check them all .. point is what has india or bcci got to do with this.. hope u too are not suggestign we bribed aleem dar during drinks with jigarthanda

 

[ParkedTheBus]

Wow, that 3-4 over spell from Wahab was sensational. Made Watson look like a schoolboy. And Rahat might've well dropped the world cup.

 

[aussie1st]

Pakistan just keeps on producing the quicks, great spell could have sent Pakistan to the semi if not for that drop.

 

[MattW]

Who said it should be different.

By suggesting it was something Bangladesh should have reviewed, which implies teams need to have a review in hand to get a height no ball checked when that's not necessary for front foot ones. A basic umpiring mistake should be resolved without the need for teams to use up reviews.

I don't care who the match was against - wrong umpiring decisions are wrong umpiring decisions. We have abundant technology to be able to make these decisions correctly - I want them to use it and for the third umpire to be empowered to reverse on field decisions without being called upon.

I think Bangladesh would have lost regardless, but it was so easy to correct this umpiring mistake that I think they are right to complain about it. Stupidity for anyone to suggest there was fixing involved, which just distracts from the legitimacy of the complaint about umpires not double checking a crucial call.

 

[grkrama]

It sort of falls in the same category as batsman questioning a fielder if he has grassed the catch, so definitely should be up for question without reviews.