View Single Post
  #18  
Old April 17, 2006, 02:21 AM
PoorFan PoorFan is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: June 15, 2004
Location: Tokyo <---> Dhaka
Posts: 14,846

Quote:
Quote from CI
"It was a communication problem really," said Crowe. "In fairness, what we had to say that with the referral upstairs, it should have been highlighted what they really wanted. Number three umpire ...... is not the most fluent in English, although he is a very good man and does communicate well, he wasn't sure really about what they wanted at that point.
"That's why after what was done, when the decision was first given, the umpire down below weren't sure he got the right information, or understood what was required. Once they found that information out, that the ball had hit the boot, that's all they needed to confirm what they thought. That's why it was reversed."




Even if Ponting had indeed asked for a referral, he was probably within the rules to do so. Law 27.5 states that:
When a batsman has been given Not out, either umpire may, within his jurisdiction, answer a further appeal ...
Considering the shades of grey involved in the whole matter, it will be interesting to see what decision is finally made.
So, every one done their job RIGHT but poor Mahbub! ( fell short in term of english ), although he is a very good man!. That will be the ONLY and FINAL outcome I am sure.
Reply With Quote