Pakistan tour of New Zealand 2009

[irottev]

I can understand a slow start but he just never kicked on. It's not good enough.

I'm glad we're having the break early. I hope it rains now because I can see us losing. It's typical. So often we get into a winning position and then in the last 2 days we just throw it away. Happens every time.

Last 10 ovs 5/2 :laugh

Exactly. And that's why we just lost 2 wickets. Yes, good bowling, but we just let them bowl and bowl without pressure.

 

[ksduded]

nice little excerpt from the commentators with the rule book:

the front foot must land on the ground with something behind the line..... Asif's front foot did land behind the line... that wasn't a no ball and even the UDRS system failed because the umpires don't even know the rules......

ICC should start a cricket law degree

 

[CG123]

What drama...

*Shaking his head* I'm pretty pissed, I got cricket practice now so I will miss all the last session today, then tomorrow afternoon I got my game... :

 

[aussie1st]

Was that no ball even called right? As the rain came through the commentators pointed out that some part of the foot must land behind the line and the sole of the foot did that for mind before sliding forward.

 

[braguvaran]

I can understand a slow start but he just never kicked on. It's not good enough.

I'm glad we're having the break early. I hope it rains now because I can see us losing. It's typical. So often we get into a winning position and then in the last 2 days we just throw it away. Happens every time.


Exactly. And that's why we just lost 2 wickets. Yes, good bowling, but we just let them bowl and bowl without pressure.

I dont really think this is a bad performance from the NZ team as a whole. This is just world class bowling. Let me tell you Nz may be facing the best attack currently in the cricketing world, atleast one of the very best!

 

[StinkyBoHoon]

4 ducks:doh

but 212 is plenty of space, pakistan can still throw it away from here.

 

[abfo]

that wasnt a noball... Rudi did not bother to use that focused camera view while deciding whether it was a noball or not. that view clearly shows a part of foot behind the line. This is very poor.

 

[braguvaran]

that wasnt a noball... Rudi did not bother to use that focused camera view while deciding whether it was a noball or not. that view clearly shows a part of foot behind the line. This is very poor.

Its a very tough call! but the irritating thing was that Rudi didnt behave like an experienced umpire, did he? He looked very confused when making that decision. May be your time is up Rudi! Not a very good year for him, was it?

 

[Crew of Black]

I really don't care if they selected this squad for the first 2 tests, Flynn & McIntosh must be dropped after this test.

 

[abfo]

well yea it was a tough call. But technically i think, with the help of the focused camera view, it wasnt a no ball and im sure Rudi would have agreed to accept that delivery as legal had he viewed that. Even the commentators believed it was legal.

And to add to that we lost one review as well, which again is wrong as we would know.

 

[irottev]

nice little excerpt from the commentators with the rule book:

the front foot must land on the ground with something behind the line..... Asif's front foot did land behind the line... that wasn't a no ball and even the UDRS system failed because the umpires don't even know the rules......

ICC should start a cricket law degree

that wasnt a noball... Rudi did not bother to use that focused camera view while deciding whether it was a noball or not. that view clearly shows a part of foot behind the line. This is very poor.

I understand your points, but you're showing a bit of bias. It's possible there was some part behind the line. Personally I believe part of his heel touched the crease behind the line but when his foot landed it was on the line at best, therefore not out. Fact is it was a marginal call and because the evidance wasn't certain the decision stood. Remember that the batsman gets the benefit of the doubt and the on-field umpire's decision should stand if there isn't conclusive evidence. The right decision was made as whether it was a noball or not could be argued both ways.

 

[Dare]

I think that if a team challenges and there is a clear mistake by to on field umpire (like in this instance) the team shouldn't lose a challenge.
If the on field umpire had called a no ball Pakistan probably wouldn't have used the challenge.

 

[ksduded]

I understand your points, but you're showing a bit of bias. It's possible there was some part behind the line. Personally I believe part of his heel touched the crease behind the line but when his foot landed it was on the line at best, therefore not out. Fact is it was a marginal call and because the evidance wasn't certain the decision stood. Remember that the batsman gets the benefit of the doubt and the on-field umpire's decision should stand if there isn't conclusive evidence. The right decision was made as whether it was a noball or not could be argued both ways.

I guess it depends on which side you are on and you see things differently... I definitely saw part of the foot behind the line.... but it just goes on to show that even the review system can't be conclusive....

 

[irottev]

They still have one don't they? It's probably not right that they lose one but there's not much you can do. Personally I feel if the bowler bowls a no-ball it's his own fault. SImple way to avoid it is for bowlers to not overstep.

 

[CaptainOZ]

The sun is out! Great. Let's hope for a full session of play.