If Rashid Latif can be banned why not Michael Clarke?

[baburao]

This happened in 2003 when Rashid Latif picked the ball from the ground and claiming the catch.He was banned for 5 matches.So same punishment should be given to Michael Clarke now.

Pak skipper Latif banned for 5 ODIs

Multan, September 7
Pakistani captain Rashid Latif has been banned for five one-day internationals by International Cricket Council (ICC) match referee Mike Procter for unfair play during the third and final cricket Test against Bangladesh in Multan.

Procter announced his verdict today after having a 45-minute hearing with Latif, Pakistan manager Haroon Rasheed, Bangladesh manager M.A. Latif Khan and the two umpires, Russell Tiffin of Zimbabwe and Asoka de Silva of Sri Lanka.

Pakistan and Bangladesh played their third Test in Multan from Wednesday to Thursday.

“It is a very serious offence. My decision is that Latif shall be banned for five ODIs,” Procter said.

Procter said the TV replays “show it convincingly — without a shadow of doubt that certain things have happened. The replays revealed that in rolling over a couple of times, Latif picked the ball up from the ground.”

“Even Latif is not saying he didn’t pick the ball off the ground. That was all in evidence for everybody to see. He is saying may be he held the ball long enough to constitute the catch.”

Procter said Latif could appeal against the decision.

http://www.tribuneindia.com/2003/20030908/sports.htm#4


Common ICC prove it you are not biased.

 

[IloveGilly]

Says your "Anti-Australia" DP. Why is Michael Clarke blamed for the catch. From a lot of replays, it is still not known whether he caught the ball or not but the rolling over was something he did not know about.

Some people will just jump the gun on anything to attack Australia.

 

[baburao]

Says your "Anti-Australia" DP. Why is Michael Clarke blamed for the catch. From a lot of replays, it is still not known whether he caught the ball or not but the rolling over was something he did not know about.

Some people will just jump the gun on anything to attack Australia.

Time for eye check up.

 

[IloveGilly]

Time for eye check up.

Eye Check, no? Michael Clarke grabbed that ball in from a single notion, when going down and taking it up with his fingers under it. It is inconclusive with the amount of angles the Australian broadcast shows. The Australian commentators said that decision can go either way, and rightly so.

*Waits for more trolls*

 

[baburao]

Eye Check, no? Michael Clarke grabbed that ball in from a single notion, when going down and taking it up with his fingers under it. It is inconclusive with the amount of angles the Australian broadcast shows. The Australian commentators said that decision can go either way, and rightly so.

*Waits for more trolls*

But third umpire Ricky Ponting gave him out.Who is he to take the decision and tell Mr Benson that ganguly was out?

 

[Dare]

wasnt Ponting the one that fliped out on Dilshan when he clamed a catch in the VB series a few years ago.
it is not easy for the player catching the ball to see if it actullay hit the ground before it went into his hands thats what you have the TV umpire for and why the TV umpire wasnt used is beyond me. they might as well remove the TV umpire if they arent going to use him in situations such as the ones in the 2nd test. and why would a umpire take the word of a fielder that it was out, Ganguly wouldnt have been out if the umpire (dont kno which of the 2 it was) didnt decide to turn hso job over to Ponting, i never knew that Pnting is a umpire i thought he was the aussie captain.

its one thing to calim a catch but not to walk like Symonds didnt when a clear edge was produced when he was batting in the 1st inings is just plain unsportsmen like, and for a umpire to miss somthing like that well he cant see well and shouldnt be in the elite panel. a blind person could have made that call.

 

[angryangy]

I thought it was a catch, the commentators seemed to think it was a catch and of course those on field accepted it was a catch, but never let the truth get in the way of a good story.

 

[Dare]

man that ball hit the ground, half of it was in his hand and half of it hit the ground. you can see in the videos that it went in between his fingers and hit the ground.

 

[pal]

I thought it was a catch, the commentators seemed to think it was a catch and of course those on field accepted it was a catch, but never let the truth get in the way of a good story.

I thought it wasn't a catch, the commentators seemed to think that it wasn't a catch and of course the batsman of the field didn't accept it was a catch, but never let the truth get in the way of a good story.

Works both ways. I guess it depends on whether you were watching Star or Sky.

 

[WORLD CHAMPIONS]

man that ball hit the ground, half of it was in his hand and half of it hit the ground. you can see in the videos that it went in between his fingers and hit the ground.

Rubbish, the ball hit the ground when Clarke rolled over and also he had the grasp over that ball .

 

[Dare]

Rubbish, the ball hit the ground when Clarke rolled over and also he had the grasp over that ball .

duuude, it doesnt matter if the ball hit the ground after Clarke rolled over it hit the ground before he got his hands under it. forget if it hit the ground after he rolled over it hit the ground when he put his ahnds to cathc it and it went thru his fingers and hit the ground.

what happened after doesnt matter.

 

[mattfb]

Time for eye check up.

Yeah, for you. He caught it.

 

[rickyp]

I'm still waiting for someone to show me this "clear view" of a dropped catch? all the camera angles were inconclusive.

 

[mattfb]

But third umpire Ricky Ponting gave him out.Who is he to take the decision and tell Mr Benson that ganguly was out?

No. The umpire asked if he caught it and Ponting was saying he did. Thats the easiest way to tell someone when the you can barely hear the person next to you.

 

[Dare]

I'm still waiting for someone to show me this "clear view" of a dropped catch? all the camera angles were inconclusive.

so if it is incoclusive if the ball carried to Clarke the batsman is out?

so if it is incoclusive if the ball carried to Clarke it is up to Ponting to decide if the batsman is out?

If the TV ump was asked i bet my house that would have been given not out. unless the TV ump was Ponting.

No. The umpire asked if he caught it and Ponting was saying he did. Thats the easiest way to tell someone when the you can barely hear the person next to you.

but who is Ponting to give him out obviosuly he is going to say whats best for his team.