Black Caps v Pakistan
-
To be fair on this one, he wouldn't have had the call. But yes, he inherited that from McCullum.
-
Kane seems to have an incredibly poor toss record. Need our resident statistician @hydro11 to break down the numbers, but recent times it's been very poor.
@No-Quarter said in Black Caps v Pakistan:
Kane seems to have an incredibly poor toss record. Need our resident statistician @hydro11 to break down the numbers, but recent times it's been very poor.
I think you are right. I just don't think it matters that much. Looks like the toss might matter on this pitch - it doesn't seem to stay green for long and it's nice to be bowling with rain around.
-
Sohail Khan to Williamson, OUT, big appeal for caught behind, umpire Fry does not budge. There's a noise there, was that a snick? Pakistan challenge the not-out on-field decision. Full and breaks back into the right-hander. Williamson drives outside the line. There is a clicking noise. No inside edge involved, Hotspot confirms it. Snicko picks up a spike, but it does so after the ball had passed the bat. Ian Gould, however, overturns the on-field call and sends Williamson on his way
KS Williamson c †Sarfraz Ahmed b Sohail Khan 13 (42b 2x4 0x6) SR: 30.95WTF?
-
Shocking call. That's the problem in trying to get old people to understand new technology...
-
Have you seen it @Stockcar86? Sounds ridiculous. It's such an easy directive to follow - "you can only overturn a decision if there is clear and obvious evidence". Add that to the fact that Hotspot is far more reliable then Snicko, to the point that Snicko wasn't even used for a long time, how are decisions being overturned based on that alone?
Basic errors like that are pretty frustrating to watch for the spectator.
-
-
@Hooroo said in Black Caps v Pakistan:
Taylor has had enough of the dross and is having a good ole slap!
Your luck is going to run out on a pitch like that before too long so might as well have a whack. Especially if his eyes are fixed
@canefan said in Black Caps v Pakistan:
@Hooroo said in Black Caps v Pakistan:
Taylor has had enough of the dross and is having a good ole slap!
Your luck is going to run out on a pitch like that before too long so might as well have a whack. Especially if his eyes are fixed
Not fixed, but not impeding his vision. He is having eye surgery after this match.
-
Rain comes down and it's 77/2 at lunch. That's a good return overall, Rosco hitting himself into form and Raval continues to be very steady at the top of the order which is bloody promising - at 28 he's no spring chicken so appears to have a good head on his shoulders. Would be great if he can parnter Latham for the next 4 - 6 years.
-
Rain comes down and it's 77/2 at lunch. That's a good return overall, Rosco hitting himself into form and Raval continues to be very steady at the top of the order which is bloody promising - at 28 he's no spring chicken so appears to have a good head on his shoulders. Would be great if he can parnter Latham for the next 4 - 6 years.
-
Have you seen it @Stockcar86? Sounds ridiculous. It's such an easy directive to follow - "you can only overturn a decision if there is clear and obvious evidence". Add that to the fact that Hotspot is far more reliable then Snicko, to the point that Snicko wasn't even used for a long time, how are decisions being overturned based on that alone?
Basic errors like that are pretty frustrating to watch for the spectator.
@No-Quarter said in Black Caps v Pakistan:
Have you seen it @Stockcar86? Sounds ridiculous. It's such an easy directive to follow - "you can only overturn a decision if there is clear and obvious evidence". Add that to the fact that Hotspot is far more reliable then Snicko, to the point that Snicko wasn't even used for a long time, how are decisions being overturned based on that alone?
Basic errors like that are pretty frustrating to watch for the spectator.
Second one I've seen like that in two days. Philander got one yesterday, with no hotspot evidence, but one single big spike on Snicko indicating the finest of edges.
To be fair, with Kane's it looked to me like he nicked it - and then it went onto his elbow and Snicko indicated that. Doull and Co. reckoned they could hear two noises and weren't upset at the decision. Mystifying that there was not hotspot mark though.
-
@No-Quarter said in Black Caps v Pakistan:
Have you seen it @Stockcar86? Sounds ridiculous. It's such an easy directive to follow - "you can only overturn a decision if there is clear and obvious evidence". Add that to the fact that Hotspot is far more reliable then Snicko, to the point that Snicko wasn't even used for a long time, how are decisions being overturned based on that alone?
Basic errors like that are pretty frustrating to watch for the spectator.
Second one I've seen like that in two days. Philander got one yesterday, with no hotspot evidence, but one single big spike on Snicko indicating the finest of edges.
To be fair, with Kane's it looked to me like he nicked it - and then it went onto his elbow and Snicko indicated that. Doull and Co. reckoned they could hear two noises and weren't upset at the decision. Mystifying that there was not hotspot mark though.
@Chris-B. said in Black Caps v Pakistan:
@No-Quarter said in Black Caps v Pakistan:
Have you seen it @Stockcar86? Sounds ridiculous. It's such an easy directive to follow - "you can only overturn a decision if there is clear and obvious evidence". Add that to the fact that Hotspot is far more reliable then Snicko, to the point that Snicko wasn't even used for a long time, how are decisions being overturned based on that alone?
Basic errors like that are pretty frustrating to watch for the spectator.
Second one I've seen like that in two days. Philander got one yesterday, with no hotspot evidence, but one single big spike on Snicko indicating the finest of edges.
To be fair, with Kane's it looked to me like he nicked it - and then it went onto his elbow and Snicko indicated that. Doull and Co. reckoned they could hear two noises and weren't upset at the decision. Mystifying that there was not hotspot mark though.
Piss off with your completely reasonable comments. WE WUZ ROBBED!!
-
@No-Quarter said in Black Caps v Pakistan:
Have you seen it @Stockcar86? Sounds ridiculous. It's such an easy directive to follow - "you can only overturn a decision if there is clear and obvious evidence". Add that to the fact that Hotspot is far more reliable then Snicko, to the point that Snicko wasn't even used for a long time, how are decisions being overturned based on that alone?
Basic errors like that are pretty frustrating to watch for the spectator.
Second one I've seen like that in two days. Philander got one yesterday, with no hotspot evidence, but one single big spike on Snicko indicating the finest of edges.
To be fair, with Kane's it looked to me like he nicked it - and then it went onto his elbow and Snicko indicated that. Doull and Co. reckoned they could hear two noises and weren't upset at the decision. Mystifying that there was not hotspot mark though.
@Chris-B. said in Black Caps v Pakistan:
@No-Quarter said in Black Caps v Pakistan:
Have you seen it @Stockcar86? Sounds ridiculous. It's such an easy directive to follow - "you can only overturn a decision if there is clear and obvious evidence". Add that to the fact that Hotspot is far more reliable then Snicko, to the point that Snicko wasn't even used for a long time, how are decisions being overturned based on that alone?
Basic errors like that are pretty frustrating to watch for the spectator.
Second one I've seen like that in two days. Philander got one yesterday, with no hotspot evidence, but one single big spike on Snicko indicating the finest of edges.
To be fair, with Kane's it looked to me like he nicked it - and then it went onto his elbow and Snicko indicated that. Doull and Co. reckoned they could hear two noises and weren't upset at the decision. Mystifying that there was not hotspot mark though.
To be fair, given Doull's performance in India, I'm not surprised he agreed with the umpires decision once again
-
I really don't think you should be able to overturn a caught behind if there is no hot spot.
@hydro11 said in Black Caps v Pakistan:
I really don't think you should be able to overturn a caught behind if there is no hot spot.
Pffffft hotspot. That could have come from anything...
