Search results

They could only do that if they had the power of a referral. The 3rd umpire would be responsible for instigating contact with the on-field umpire and would only do so in exceptional circumstances, i.e. where there had been a glaringly obvious error over a key decision and where a team could not...

Had Australia won, would you have felt that Ashton Agar scoring a further 92 runs after he'd been stumped but had been given not out (wrongly) had been the game changer? Australia added over 100 runs after that decision, whereas Broad made another 28 runs and England about another 70-80 runs...

I'm suggesting the 3rd umpire has the power of attorney to overturn blatant errors in the event of a team having used up their review. The 3rd umpire isn't going to get involved in overturning marginal LBW decisions unless a referral has been made to him. It won't make it worse because those...

What I'm saying is that the third umpire should only intervene if an obvious error has occurred from the on-field umpire, but where the 'wronged' team is not in a position to challenge because they've used up their challenges. It should be at the third umpire's discretion, however, if they feel...

If Australia hadn't wasted their referrals on rather frivolous LBW appeals then they'd have been able to refer to the third umpire and get the decision overturned. Australia used up their referrals thinking they could rip through the England middle order, but in doing so, they took a gamble and...