Day 3, 4th Test - SA vs Eng - Johannesburg

[jot1]

Originally Posted by Occasional Fan

Pretty bad stuff, that!

Back to business: did Tresco really take the catch that sent Dippenaar back? Web reports have it as "very marginal" and the crowd apparently didn't like it much. What is the verdict of the impartial observers here?

slowmo showed the ball was on the ground. bad decision by the ump he should have referred it. a previous test same thing the decision went to the batsman

[Pete]

No it didn't! It showed Trez had his fingers underneath it, even Allan Donald said so.

[Alison]

Originally Posted by jot1

bad decision by the ump he should have referred it.

I thought the umpires were only allowed to refer catches if they were unsighted.

[Maranello]

Yeh I agree Pete, was a difficult call even on slow motion, but looked out to me. That is what the commentators thought too. In any case, I doubt Trescothick would claim a catch if he knew the ball had touched the ground.

This is why I feel the best way on these calls is not to rely on the inconclusive TV evidence, but to give the initiative to the fielder, and take them at their word. Pakistan and Australia made a gentleman's agreement to do that before their series, and I feel that is the way to go - relying on replays is not definite, and implies that the player is not telling the truth when he claims a catch.

[jot1]

Originally Posted by Maranello

Yeh I agree Pete, was a difficult call even on slow motion, but looked out to me. That is what the commentators thought too. In any case, I doubt Trescothick would claim a catch if he knew the ball had touched the ground.

This is why I feel the best way on these calls is not to rely on the inconclusive TV evidence, but to give the initiative to the fielder, and take them at their word. Pakistan and Australia made a gentleman's agreement to do that before their series, and I feel that is the way to go - relying on replays is not definite, and implies that the player is not telling the truth when he claims a catch.

so what you're saying is trust all cricket players, they're all honest. not even our guys are!

[Alison]

I believe C4 did an experiment during the summer, where they held balls at various heights above the pitch or something like that, and discovered that the TV replays showed the ball as maybe touching the ground when it was being held some way off the ground.

[Rahul_Dravid_is_No.1]

Sorry Maranello but it is my opinion that you cannot say the tv replays and technology are not definate, and then say to rely on the fielder!!!! if it is very close they can easily get away with it!!!!! a bit off topic, but when aussy toured india, gilly was appealing to edges that never happened and was egtting away with it!!!


and about the over rate thing. yes saffers have been pretty bad aswell. but throughout the whole serious, i believe england have been worse...... i remember one session when their over rate was closer to 11! now that is abysmal. but yes, saffers have been around 13-14 quite often and havnt been the quickest themselves....
who remembers hayden's little attempts to waste time during the pakistan series? deliberate time wasting or what....

[Occasional Fan]

Originally Posted by Rahul_Dravid_is_No.1

and about the over rate thing. yes saffers have been pretty bad aswell. but throughout the whole serious, i believe england have been worse.

These things are easy to check, and we should be careful about firing off criticisms before we have done so (I was guilty of this last evening).

RD1 is correct - but actually the difference in over rates is presently very small. To the end of yesterday, in this series South Africa have bowled 702.5 overs in 3,066 minutes, an average of 4 minutes and 21 seconds per over. England have bowled 579.3 overs in 2,576 minutes, an average of 4 minutes and 27 seconds per over. The difference of 6 seconds per over is less than 2%. I'll update this to the end of the series and stick the calculations on the board for anyone who is interested.

As for the comment that England have been worse throughout the series, well, that doesnt stand up. Innings by innings it is pretty much nip and tuck. My conclusion is that either both captains have a case to answer before the referees or neither of them does.

[Occasional Fan]

Following the now established custom, I have opened a new thread for comments on the 4th day's play. Please post them there.