Dharmasena was checking for the run-out as the batsmen were looking to sneak a leg bye and it appears Maxwell has found his target to leave Anderson short of his ground. But how can that be considering Dar had given it out lbw and that means the ball must be dead. Taylor keeps telling it is dead ball, repeating it over and over, but Australia are already shaking hands and the umpires confirm that Anderson is indeed run out
From the ICC ODI playing conditions, Appendix 7, "Decision Review System" :-
3.6 Dead ball
a) If following a Player Review request, an original decision of ‘Out’ is changed to ‘Not Out’, then the ball is still deemed to have become dead when the original decision was made (as per Law 23.1(a)(iii)).
MCC Law 23.1 (a) (iii)
The ball becomes dead when a batsman is dismissed. The ball will be deemed to be dead from the instant of the incident causing the dismissal.
The "instant of the incident causing the dismissal" is when Taylor was struck on the pad. The ball should have been deemed dead from then, Anderson should not have been out.
It took me less than a minute to look this up. It is ridiculous that ICC match officials could not have done the same.
I have put a £30 bet for them to win. I believe they will win it or South Africa
I was surprised at how good the averages are of the NZ batting line up. Certainly is a strong team. Always had a soft spot for them, well i have always wanted them to do better than Australia anyway
Why isn't Alex Hales in the team? These days good teams like Australia, NZ, SA regularly score well in excess of 300 and England with Ali, Ballance, Morgan, Taylor making up the heart of the team it is unlikely they will chase those scores down. Two of those four would be okay because you need a few steady batsmen who the team team plays around but there are too many. You also need a couple of really aggressive, hard hitters in there. It was stupid of England to leave out KP out of the squad, and not play Hales. I think Hales needs to be brought back in and Buttler needs to come in at 5.
The problem with Ali is that he is bit of an all rounder with his spin bowling otherwise he wouldn't be in my ODI team. Neither would Bopara, who reminds me of those bits-and-pieces players England were so fond of in the 90s. He will come good once in a while when players are trying to be expansive and get a few cheap wickets that way, and through batsmen underestimating his bowling. But he simply isn't international class in my opinion.
Also, why did England bring back Moores as coach? How do you bring in a coach who is a proven failure? I think they should have had Tom Moody in there. But the coach can only do so much when you have so few high quality cricketers in the country. They need something to work with.
From the ICC ODI playing conditions, Appendix 7, "Decision Review System" :-
3.6 Dead ball
a) If following a Player Review request, an original decision of ‘Out’ is changed to ‘Not Out’, then the ball is still deemed to have become dead when the original decision was made (as per Law 23.1(a)(iii)).
MCC Law 23.1 (a) (iii)
The ball becomes dead when a batsman is dismissed. The ball will be deemed to be dead from the instant of the incident causing the dismissal.
The "instant of the incident causing the dismissal" is when Taylor was struck on the pad. The ball should have been deemed dead from then, Anderson should not have been out.
It took me less than a minute to look this up. It is ridiculous that ICC match officials could not have done the same.
Although the law states he shouldn't be out but if you think logically, he should actually be given. The ICC needs to update the legislation on this. The bowler bowled, hit him on the pad, they took a run, the fielder hits the stumps and the batsman was short of his ground. It was all part of the same play. So when he had the decision referred it was found he wasn't LBW, for which he was correctly given not out, but the umpires should be able to then refer the batsman for the the run out since it followed in the same sequence of play. Because think about it, had the LBW appeal not been made the leg bye would have been given.
If a batsman gets hit on the pad and the bowlers appeals, the batsman is still able to take a leg bye(s), which happens all the time (particularly in limited overs cricket) but still leaves himself exposed to a potential run out.
Why isn't Alex Hales in the team? These days good teams like Australia, NZ, SA regularly score well in excess of 300 and England with Ali, Ballance, Morgan, Taylor making up the heart of the team it is unlikely they will chase those scores down. Two of those four would be okay because you need a few steady batsmen who the team team plays around but there are too many. You also need a couple of really aggressive, hard hitters in there. It was stupid of England to leave out KP out of the squad, and not play Hales. I think Hales needs to be brought back in and Buttler needs to come in at 5.
The problem with Ali is that he is bit of an all rounder with his spin bowling otherwise he wouldn't be in my ODI team. Neither would Bopara, who reminds me of those bits-and-pieces players England were so fond of in the 90s. He will come good once in a while when players are trying to be expansive and get a few cheap wickets that way, and through batsmen underestimating his bowling. But he simply isn't international class in my opinion.
Also, why did England bring back Moores as coach? How do you bring in a coach who is a proven failure? I think they should have had Tom Moody in there. But the coach can only do so much when you have so few high quality cricketers in the country. They need something to work with.
Because Hales hasn't done well in his limited ODI career, so isn't worthy of a recall, certainly not at the expense of Ali who adds that bowling option too.
I expect the same XI to play the next game but i wouldnt be surprised if Ballance and Taylor swap positions.
Ali has one 50 in his last 12 matches. His place should be questioned.
How we have managed to lurch from quite rightly ditching Cook to replacing him with an even more out of form captain is beyond ridiculous.
Ali has one 50 in his last 12 matches. His place should be questioned.
How we have managed to lurch from quite rightly ditching Cook to replacing him with an even more out of form captain is beyond ridiculous.
I believe your position should only be questioned when there is somebody better suited to take it. In Ali's case i dont see that
Although the law states he shouldn't be out but if you think logically, he should actually be given. The ICC needs to update the legislation on this. The bowler bowled, hit him on the pad, they took a run, the fielder hits the stumps and the batsman was short of his ground. It was all part of the same play. So when he had the decision referred it was found he wasn't LBW, for which he was correctly given not out, but the umpires should be able to then refer the batsman for the the run out since it followed in the same sequence of play. Because think about it, had the LBW appeal not been made the leg bye would have been given.
If a batsman gets hit on the pad and the bowlers appeals, the batsman is still able to take a leg bye(s), which happens all the time (particularly in limited overs cricket) but still leaves himself exposed to a potential run out.
Logically he should be out (I don't disagree with you), but under the rules of the day, he should not be out. And the umpires (all three of them) should umpire the game under the rules of the day, i.e. the MCC Laws and the ICC ODI Playing Conditions together. Under those, the ball was dead. So Anderson should not have been given out. Logic or no logic.
There is precedent (not for being given out, but for runs not being given), where the rules have been applied correctly. I think it was in South Africa in an ODI where the batsman was given out LBW and the ball ran away to the fine leg boundary. The batsman reviewed the decision and it was overturned, but the runs were not awarded. It was harsh on the batting team, for the same logic you state, but it was the rules.
Although the law states he shouldn't be out but if you think logically, he should actually be given. The ICC needs to update the legislation on this. The bowler bowled, hit him on the pad, they took a run, the fielder hits the stumps and the batsman was short of his ground. It was all part of the same play. So when he had the decision referred it was found he wasn't LBW, for which he was correctly given not out, but the umpires should be able to then refer the batsman for the the run out since it followed in the same sequence of play. Because think about it, had the LBW appeal not been made the leg bye would have been given.
If a batsman gets hit on the pad and the bowlers appeals, the batsman is still able to take a leg bye(s), which happens all the time (particularly in limited overs cricket) but still leaves himself exposed to a potential run out.
Disappointing for Taylor. Pity they didn't listen to him when he kept stating that it was a dead ball.
I thought at one point that they would have to turn around and go back on if their mistake was pointed out by another official?
I can't see past Australia, SA and NZ. But the with ODI cricket once you reach the knockout stages you just never know. You could have one horrible day and that could be that. But if everything goes to plan, I think it's Australia or NZ. NZ have a very good team and play all matches at home bar the final (if they get there) where they look unbeatable at the moment. But SA actually seem to have the best lineup on paper in Amla, De Kock, Di Villiers, Du Plessis, Miller, Duminy, Morkel, Steyn. But they will somehow mess up in one of the big matches.
Scragend, I agree with you that they have to go with the rules of the day. So Taylor shouldn't have been given out on that basis. But commonsense should come into play, and in the future the rule needs to be updated.
Comments
The umpires have got that wrong
Have the laws been changed ?
Poor decision that
Dharmasena was checking for the run-out as the batsmen were looking to sneak a leg bye and it appears Maxwell has found his target to leave Anderson short of his ground. But how can that be considering Dar had given it out lbw and that means the ball must be dead. Taylor keeps telling it is dead ball, repeating it over and over, but Australia are already shaking hands and the umpires confirm that Anderson is indeed run out
Let's just hope the final table doesn't come down to net run rate eh?
As i mentioned above, South Africa for me, but is this the best chance New Zealand have ever had ? Very strong line up
From the ICC ODI playing conditions, Appendix 7, "Decision Review System" :-
3.6 Dead ball
a) If following a Player Review request, an original decision of ‘Out’ is changed to ‘Not Out’, then the ball is still deemed to have become dead when the original decision was made (as per Law 23.1(a)(iii)).
MCC Law 23.1 (a) (iii)
The ball becomes dead when a batsman is dismissed. The ball will be deemed to be dead from the instant of the incident causing the dismissal.
The "instant of the incident causing the dismissal" is when Taylor was struck on the pad. The ball should have been deemed dead from then, Anderson should not have been out.
It took me less than a minute to look this up. It is ridiculous that ICC match officials could not have done the same.
I have put a £30 bet for them to win. I believe they will win it or South Africa
I was surprised at how good the averages are of the NZ batting line up. Certainly is a strong team. Always had a soft spot for them, well i have always wanted them to do better than Australia anyway
The problem with Ali is that he is bit of an all rounder with his spin bowling otherwise he wouldn't be in my ODI team. Neither would Bopara, who reminds me of those bits-and-pieces players England were so fond of in the 90s. He will come good once in a while when players are trying to be expansive and get a few cheap wickets that way, and through batsmen underestimating his bowling. But he simply isn't international class in my opinion.
Also, why did England bring back Moores as coach? How do you bring in a coach who is a proven failure? I think they should have had Tom Moody in there. But the coach can only do so much when you have so few high quality cricketers in the country. They need something to work with.
Although the law states he shouldn't be out but if you think logically, he should actually be given. The ICC needs to update the legislation on this. The bowler bowled, hit him on the pad, they took a run, the fielder hits the stumps and the batsman was short of his ground. It was all part of the same play. So when he had the decision referred it was found he wasn't LBW, for which he was correctly given not out, but the umpires should be able to then refer the batsman for the the run out since it followed in the same sequence of play. Because think about it, had the LBW appeal not been made the leg bye would have been given.
If a batsman gets hit on the pad and the bowlers appeals, the batsman is still able to take a leg bye(s), which happens all the time (particularly in limited overs cricket) but still leaves himself exposed to a potential run out.
ICC confirm there was a mistake made over the Anderson dismissal. "It was human error". It probably cost Taylor an MCG ton. Statement soon
Because Hales hasn't done well in his limited ODI career, so isn't worthy of a recall, certainly not at the expense of Ali who adds that bowling option too.
I expect the same XI to play the next game but i wouldnt be surprised if Ballance and Taylor swap positions.
How we have managed to lurch from quite rightly ditching Cook to replacing him with an even more out of form captain is beyond ridiculous.
I believe your position should only be questioned when there is somebody better suited to take it. In Ali's case i dont see that
At least Taylor deserves some credit for taking the decision with good grace. I don't think I, or many others, would have been so accepting.
Logically he should be out (I don't disagree with you), but under the rules of the day, he should not be out. And the umpires (all three of them) should umpire the game under the rules of the day, i.e. the MCC Laws and the ICC ODI Playing Conditions together. Under those, the ball was dead. So Anderson should not have been given out. Logic or no logic.
There is precedent (not for being given out, but for runs not being given), where the rules have been applied correctly. I think it was in South Africa in an ODI where the batsman was given out LBW and the ball ran away to the fine leg boundary. The batsman reviewed the decision and it was overturned, but the runs were not awarded. It was harsh on the batting team, for the same logic you state, but it was the rules.
The ICC have confirmed the umpires were wrong.
Disappointing for Taylor. Pity they didn't listen to him when he kept stating that it was a dead ball.
I thought at one point that they would have to turn around and go back on if their mistake was pointed out by another official?
Scragend, I agree with you that they have to go with the rules of the day. So Taylor shouldn't have been given out on that basis. But commonsense should come into play, and in the future the rule needs to be updated.
I've had a few quid on NZ, they've got home advantage until the final and they're strong in all disciplines. Can't see beyond them, SA or Australia.