AUS vs IND | Twitter questions umpiring after Kettleborough misreads Ultraedge to burn India's review
no image
9099
Australia's top-order fell prey to Jasprit Bumrah’s heat with the ball in the first hour of the morning session but Travis Head and Marnus Labuschagne came to the rescue against the worn-out ball. The pair orchestrated a 65 runs partnership in between to keep the Indian bowlers at bay before Nitish Kumar Reddy turned out to be the visitors golden arm. With India looking to seize the moment and make further inroads, the TV um🌌pire assisted new batter Mitchell Marsh in the 58th over.
The third ball of the 58th over saw Ashwin spray a fuller one at the stumps that Marsh tried to prod forward and play at it. As the ball spun into the right-hander a tad bit, the batter⛎ was thud at the pad followed by the Indian appeal getting overturned by umpire Richard Illingworth. However, the visitors reviewed the decision and to everyone’s surprise TV umpire Richard Kettleborough hurried the decision and ♒gave Not Out on the basis of Snicko. For a twist, the broadcaster replays showed a different angle that suggested that the ball hit the pad first. The Indian contingent seemed bemused by the TV umpire’s process who didn’t follow the protocols and avoided the ball tracking. Eventually, India lost a review due to ‘inconclusive evidence’ and the Twitterverse seemed visibly frustrated.
It was same
"KL's was the same in Perth, two spikes" 🍿
— POTT⁷⁶⁵ (@KlolZone)
Very hard
Bat or pa🎃d first? Hard to say - sticking with the umpire's call
— cricket.com.au (@cricketcomau)
Controversy
Third umpire couldn't recognise whether it's bat or pad first and declared batter as not out
— HXF (@huzaiff_01)
Virat to Umpire : KL's was the same in Perth,𒅌 two spikes bat and pad.
Pad first
Definitely ♑pad first and Umpire didn't even went for ball tracking. Same old aussies chea🐻ting again!!!
— Div🦁 (@div_yumm)
Shocker
How is this not pad first 𝔍!!! What a shocker of a decision this is !!
— Cricketism (@MidnightMusinng)
What was he doing?
No Conclusive evidence - Haven’t going pet protocols - snicko completely saying pad first
— रोहित जुगलान Rohit Juglan (@rohitjuglan)
What was that Richard Ketel doing there
Hill to die on
This is my hill to die on. When on-field umpire gives not out, he has to say why. If he thought bat first, but ball was hitting the stumps & then technology shows it was pad first - the on-field call should change.
— Saurabh Somani (@saurabh_42)
Also in thi𓆏s case, India wouldn't have lost a reဣview at least.
Bat first
Haha that review if this was india🌳n player specially kohli it wou♛ld have been pad first. But if it's an australian player so bat first.
— Archer (@poserarcher)
True
If it was Virat Kohli, itꦫ would’ve been pad first. 😂
— Krishna. (@KrishVK_18)
Definetly pad first
It was definitely pad first… the umpires seem unsure of what they’re doing. No conclusive evidence? But look here… it cle🤡arly shows the ball hit the pad firs🐟t!
— Vipin Tiwari (@Vipintiwari952)
It's Clear
I'm 100% sure there have been atleast 2 instances with Kohli where his bat pad was much closer at time of contact and both times he was given out
— Pricviz (@Pric_viz_)
Here it was clearly pad first
Comments
Leave a comment0 Comments