There was a noise that happened after the ball went past the bat. Nothing
else could have made that noise. Could the "Real Time Snicko" be out of
sync that day, even for just a millisecond? I don't think anything else
that could've made that noise. I'd be more than happy to hear everyone
else's theories, but I still think "Real Time Snicko" was out of sync.
No Punlio, the DRS didn't fail. The evidence was inconsistent, so there was
little choice but to stay with the on-field decision. If all the evidence
points against the on-field decision without contradiction, then you can
overturn the decision. That's the system as it stands. In this case visual
evidence and sound evidence indicated the possibility that the on-field
decision was correct, so that's why they couldn't overturn it. The third
umpire has to go on ALL the evidence before him.
Jon LeSouef Says:
15/12/2013 1:09:14 PM
There was a noise that happened after the ball went past the bat. Nothing else could have made that noise. Could the "Real Time Snicko" be out of sync that day, even for just a millisecond? I don't think anything else that could've made that noise. I'd be more than happy to hear everyone else's theories, but I still think "Real Time Snicko" was out of sync.
WrathFilmzHD Says:
15/12/2013 2:02:45 AM
reminds me of the Usman Khwaja dismissal
Marcus T. Anthony Says:
14/12/2013 10:39:02 PM
No Punlio, the DRS didn't fail. The evidence was inconsistent, so there was little choice but to stay with the on-field decision. If all the evidence points against the on-field decision without contradiction, then you can overturn the decision. That's the system as it stands. In this case visual evidence and sound evidence indicated the possibility that the on-field decision was correct, so that's why they couldn't overturn it. The third umpire has to go on ALL the evidence before him.