ICC CRICKET WORLD CUP 24

[Scabutz]

Caught the last couple of overs. Well done to India but SA came close.

Anyone a fan of the film 83 on Netflix? I noticed the song from that playing in the stand when India won. Nice touch. If you have Netflix and have no clue what I am on about find it and watch it, its great.

[Motorman74]

That catch was absolutely amazing.

Turning point of the match. Really good final.

[M11rph]

Motorman74 said:

That catch was absolutely amazing.

Turning point of the match. Really good final.

Amazing catch, should have been signalled 6 however. TV Umpire appears to have got it wrong.

[Scaleybrat]

M11rph said:

Motorman74 said:

That catch was absolutely amazing.

Turning point of the match. Really good final.

Amazing catch, should have been signalled 6 however. TV Umpire appears to have got it wrong.

I thought the replays didn’t show the foot against the boundary very well but show me the evidence

[thegreenhell]

Scaleybrat said:

I thought the replays didn’t show the foot against the boundary very well but show me the evidence

I think the question is where the boundary is? Is it defined only by the rope, and if the rope moves at some point the boundary moves with it, or is it where it is set at the start of the innings? In this case it appeared from the grass marks that the boundary rope had been pushed back at some point and not replaced fully, so where the fielder's foot was when he caught the ball would have been over the original boundary position.

[PhilkSVR]

I reckon that taking a pragmatic view it follows the rope as this must happen all the time with the amount of collisions that take place in T20. I have never seen it queried before by the 3rd umpire. However having said that I don’t know what the ‘rule’ is. Logically the boundaries are defined when play commences however, how easy that is to enforce I don’t know.

[thegreenhell]

https://www.lords.org/mcc/the-laws-of-cricket/boun...

19.1.1 Before the toss, the umpires shall determine the boundary of the field of play, which shall be fixed for the duration of the match.

and

19.3 Restoring the boundary

If a solid object used to mark the boundary is disturbed for any reason, then

19.3.1 the boundary shall be considered to be in its original position.

[thegreenhell]

There have been instances where boundaries have been awarded without the ball touching the rope when the fielder slides and moves the rope and the ball passes the original rope position, but in that instance it is clear that the boundary rope has moved. I think it is generally assumed that once the rope has been returned to something close to its original position then the rope is the boundary again, even if it is not exactly in its original position.

[PhilkSVR]

That makes sense to me otherwise you can imagine the implications. Common sense should prevail where possible.

[Magikarp]

It’s good to see some common sense prevailing rather the unyielding, unthinking application of the “laws” in their wearisome, pedantic detail. Amazing catch, and should be applauded rather than nitpicked over by some adenoidal keyboard perfectionist.

[M11rph]

Sounds like someone had a good party.

Here's a still from the footage that Umpire Kettleborough missed.



Clearly he got it wrong, did Suryakumar Yadav know? He was looking directly at his feet and took three paces outside the boundary, but was possibly focused on the boundary cushions.

[type-r]

On a separate note, sad to see Kohli announce his retirement from T20I's in the post-match TV interview - even seemed to catch the interviewer by surprise. Will miss him - starred in the final - and it will be a while before we see another batting superstar like him in the game.

Silver lining - at least there is the IPL....

[GloverMart]

M11rph said:

Sounds like someone had a good party.

Here's a still from the footage that Umpire Kettleborough missed.



Clearly he got it wrong, did Suryakumar Yadav know? He was looking directly at his feet and took three paces outside the boundary, but was possibly focused on the boundary cushions.

I'm not sure Yadav would have had the time to figure that out given everything that happened was in the space of a couple of seconds.

But I guess the third umpire would have been helpless anyway as the boundary cushion, although obviously a distance further out than it should be, remains the "deciding" line between a catch or no catch. Not sure he could have done anything about it, he couldn't have given it out, surely?

I've gone to countless cricket matches over the years and have never seen anyone put back boundary cushions after they had been disturbed. Presumably it is either relying on players replacing them or groundstaff coming around and fixing them.