Forums
Welcome to Live View – Take the tour to learn more
Start Tour
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
jonnyboykimber
26 Aug 19 12:53
Joined:
Date Joined: 13 Jul 03
| Topic/replies: 163 | Blogger: jonnyboykimber's blog
Simple question.  Do you think there should be more reviews allowed in a match than their currently is
Show More
Loading...
Report Angoose August 26, 2019 1:21 PM BST
Do you mean more incorrect reviews ?
At present, you can make as many reviews as you like.
Report jonnyboykimber August 26, 2019 3:28 PM BST
Forgive me if i am wrong but I believe there are 2 reviews allowed in each inning or after 80 overs of an innings
Report detraveller August 26, 2019 4:29 PM BST
You are allowed 2 unsuccessful review. If you review a dismissal and the decision is overturned or was umpires call, you don't lose the review.

But if your review proves the ump was 100% correct, you lose the review.
Report Angoose August 26, 2019 4:41 PM BST
What he said, and here is the wording from the ICC regulations that summarise the player review element.
There is, however, a lot more verbiage than just these two clauses within the ICC regulations, including the availaibity of umprie reviews.

3.6 Number of Player Review requests permitted

3.6.1 In each innings, each team shall be allowed to make a maximum of two Player Review requests that are categorised as ‘Unsuccessful’ (as set out in paragraph 3.6.3 below).

3.6.2 Where a request for a Player Review results in the original on-field decision being reversed, then the Player Review shall be categorised as ‘Successful’ and shall not count towards the innings limit.

https://icc-static-files.s3.amazonaws.com/ICC/document/2018/09/27/061adf29-5cf7-486b-858b-ca5ad6bde935/03-Mens-Test-Match-Playing-Conditions-2018.pdf

So, going back to your original question.
I suspect that the question was intended to ask opinions on whether teams should be allowed a higher number of unsuccessful reviews.

My personal opinion to that question would be no.

What would be more beneficial would be for a re-education program to be rolled out to get back to the original intention of the DRS system when it was first introduced i.e. a mechanism to allow clear errors to be reviewed and overturned.
Report sewter lives again August 26, 2019 4:45 PM BST
no
Report jonnyboykimber August 27, 2019 2:20 PM BST
Yes I did mean that Angoose and you are exactly right with how the review system works   My own opinion is there is the technology to get decisions right but with the number of incorrect reviews allowed being so low often means that incorrect are made later on.  If would like to see something like 6 unsuccessful reviews per innings.  I know this would encourage some hopeful reviews but thats better than wrongs decisions altering the result of a match.  How I detest umpires call decisions. The same ball can either be given in our out depending on what the original decision was is plainly wrong to me.  If a ball is fair according to  the rules and hits the stumps no matter who how much it should be out.
Report Whisperingdeath August 27, 2019 3:22 PM BST
Have some people ever played cricket I wonder?

There were plenty of reasons to give Stokes not out from That ball from Lyon. Plenty of doubt in the Umpires mind and finally there is no absolute certainty Hawk Eye did not pick up the flick off Stokes front pad!

Forget the final twist that cost Aus the game? What about the others equally or more important.

England won fair and square. The game was the real winner!
Report leviathan August 27, 2019 4:00 PM BST
I didn't know that other people had noticed the hawkeye predicted path for the Lyon appeal.  Unless the ball was going to start swinging after it bounced then it seems pretty likely that hawkeye got the impact point wrong which made the "plumb lbw" decidedly less plumb.
Report Whisperingdeath August 27, 2019 4:32 PM BST
absolutely!

The bottom line is it is bloody difficult for the naked eye. It at time appears equally difficult on occasion for Hawk Eye as in this instance. Also the sound technology for edges is not 100% either.

People complaining about Umpiring in my view have got it wrong unless they say we do not need neutral Umpires anymore. We trust them all. Lets have the best available.

I remember Javed Miandad not being given out lbw in Pakistan till the World Cup with neutral umpires. There was more to complain about back in the day. Has anybody seen the footage of The real Whispering Death kicking a stump out down under? or series where Aussies umpires would not give their own batsmen out lbw?

Those decisions were travesties. Today's are sometimes mistakes. Sometimes they are not. The Umpire must give the batsman the benefit of the doubt! Just because Hawk Eye states out does not mean the Umpire should have given it with the naked eye! That is not even a mistake imho let alone a howler!
Report mafeking August 27, 2019 5:20 PM BST
yep in the 70/71 series which england won 2-0 they either 0 or 1 lbw decision in the whole series and can forget mike gatting blowing his top after a series of very dodgy decisions

problem is that at the moment more than half the elite panel are either english or australian so a very limited choicem for the ashes. where has erasmus been so far ? certainly the best of the rest if you ask me
Post Your Reply
<CTRL+Enter> to submit
Please login to post a reply.

Wonder

Instance ID: 13539
www.betfair.com