West Indies tour of Australia, November-December 2009

Status
Not open for further replies.
I love when there's only one man in the deep and he is just picked out like it's a catching drill.
 
They are collapsing like cards now, Taylor probably couldn't be bothered with it.

aussie1st added 0 Minutes and 45 Seconds later...

Close decision, I thought the only way they can give that out is if the middle of the ball was hitting the stump.

The umpire gave it so the 50/50 calls go back to what the umpire called.
 
Blah Blah here we go with the Ponting bashing again :facepalm

A great century from the 19 year old, I said yesterday he looks a bit similar to Tendulkar, however his strength is off-side rather than leg-side.
 
Blah Blah here we go with the Ponting bashing again :facepalm

what Ponting bashing?

The umpire gave it so the 50/50 calls go back to what the umpire called.

Ok so how is it different that one guy is given not out with the ball barely hitting the stumps and the other guys is given out and the ball is again barely hitting the stumps.
I know what your saying about the umpires decision being the deciding factor in 50/50 calls but it doesn't make sense when the deliveries are the same, but the end result is different.
 
Last edited:
Blah Blah here we go with the Ponting bashing again :facepalm

A great century from the 19 year old, I said yesterday he looks a bit similar to Tendulkar, however his strength is off-side rather than leg-side.

Ponting bashing?
 
Ok so how is it different that one guy is given not out with the ball barely hitting the stumps and the other guys is given out and the ball is again barely hitting the stumps.
I know what your saying about the umpires decision being the deciding factor in 50/50 calls but it doesn't make sense when the deliveries are the same, but the end result is different.

Ponting was given not out that's why, the original decision stands unless there is enough doubt to prove otherwise - a good enough portion of the ball was hitting leg stump for Barath, not enough was hitting the top of the bails to give Ponting out.
 
Ponting was given not out that's why, the original decision stands unless there is enough doubt to prove otherwise - a good enough portion of the ball was hitting leg stump for Barath, not enough was hitting the top of the bails to give Ponting out.

Same amount of the ball was hitting Baraths and Pontings. Or barely glancing, which ever you prefer.


I would love for that gatorade bottle to run over that guy that keeps running in front of it.
 
Same amount of the ball was hitting Baraths and Pontings. Or barely glancing, which ever you prefer.

OMFG enough with Ponting bashing.

The umpires thought Ponting might have got an edge, and Roach was bowling MUCH faster than Watson, so it was harder to see.


GEEEET OVVVVVERRRRR ITTTTTTTTTT
 
Same amount of the ball was hitting Baraths and Pontings. Or barely glancing, which ever you prefer.

It's not getting through to you, there needs to be enough evidence to overturn the original umpire's decision. If the umpire gave Barath not out and Watson reviewed it then in all probability it would have stood as not out.
 
It's not getting through to you, there needs to be enough evidence to overturn the original umpire's decision. If the umpire gave Barath not out and Watson reviewed it then in all probability it would have stood as not out.

It would have stood dat way, coz it was orange, this is a given.
 
OMFG enough with Ponting bashing.

The umpires thought Ponting might have got an edge, and Roach was bowling MUCH faster than Watson, so it was harder to see.


GEEEET OVVVVVERRRRR ITTTTTTTTTT

dude what tweaking Ponting bashing? Im questioning the umpires decision, not saying anything about Ponting. Reading helps dude.

2yxjdib.jpg
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Top