How a botched run out, another umpire howler and a burned review cost Australia the Test

Shouldn't you be booing cricketers after they make centuries Jacko?

I am OK with checking every decision for its accuracy, especially when we have umpires like Joel Wilson with such a poor track record. You can not resile from the fact that if that decision had been given out (as it should have been according to the rules of cricket) then Australia would be celebrating another win in the Ashes Series. Bad umpiring is bad umpiring and sometimes it can have an immense impact! If the decision was reviewed then it would have been out and the match would have been over! PS: That would be "Counselling" or did you mean that I should be looking at Development Applications?

Your conclusion is wrong. Apart from the fact that it wasn't a test match but a one day match most of us were horrified at the action , including the bowler and other Australian players even though it was legal. It should never have been used .

Brilliant suggestion that would mean we would have more referrals than cricket and completely ruin the game as a spectator sport. What we have know is probably the best we can have and over the five tests the strongest team will still win.

I’m coming to the conclusion that some posters here don’t like the rules of the game when it works against them but have no problem to when a last ball of a test match was rolled slowly along the pitch to take a four to loose the game impossible. It was in the rules then and altered immediately after.

Anon, for a smart man, that's genuinely dumb. You can't overturn the result of a poor umpire call. Otherwise they'd have to nullify every single game where a poor umpire call was made. Everyone. It's like those loons that search for 4 more runs for Bradman. They never realised that for every run he wasn't credited, he was also incorrectly credited runs too.

If he thought it was missing then he must have thought it was close. Because England had a review left the only logical thing to do was give it out and allow the replay to give a fair assessment. What he did wasn't fair or logical even if it can be justified with black and white thinking.

yes and you should go to councilling......If you want to blame the Ump for that decision then please review every decision from the whole match...You may find that Aus got the rub of the green...Not that you would know...too busy going off at the ump to bother understanding what went on and whatbthe rules are....Its all good when its in your favor eh?....

Or Lyons....

Forty I think the bigger story is the simple easy basic skills required to run a player out with no real pressure on him time wise.......Was that genuine ?????????

he had heaps of logic....He wasnt sure it was hitting so went with Not out.....Which is what he is supposed to do.....

Good luck with that one....Let us know how you go as many people will want many many matches results changed

They were

very well reasoned post chris . Totally agree. Unfortunately also its not just the third test. Paine has done it three tests in a row with half a dozen plus poor DRS calls .Its the fact that its happened all series despite the last review being so costly that its a tipping point as it could have the most dire consequences if we don’t retain the ashes . Im not sure langer can remove paine now but he won’t last long and must be thinking long and hard about it and the balance of the squad as if paine wasn’t in we could have more runs from a batsmen and or an extra bowler in such as starc

The most disturbing thing Paine said was he expected the umpire to make decisions based on the batsman still having reviews left! Even his coach, Langer, was mortified by that idea, and came out against that saying he’d hate to see it. But it explains why Paine “dabbled”. He burnt his review expecting umpires to pass their decision making responsibility to the batsmen and DRS! This is not the thinking of a guy who should be captaining. What if the umpire did think this way? What if he thought an lbw was not out but called it out knowing the batsman would review... and then it was umpire’s call? As I say, really disturbing that Paine expects umpires to compromise their decision making this way. Re the DRS, if they’re going to leave it in players’ hands, they should cut the time allowed to call for a review to 10 seconds, that would get rid of most of the dabbling. If it’s a howler, you won’t need 10 seconds. And if it was already this way, Paine wouldn’t have dabbled, and Aussies would have retained the Ashes.

Sure, plenty of other botched opportunities BUT Australia would still have won the match and the Ashes right there if the umpire had gone to SpecSavers!

That is the bit we know Benny!

So what we actually want is for the rules to be enforced accurately!

There are a swag of stories about the game and why the umpire didn't stick his finger up is clearly a huge story whether you like it or not. It's a valid discussion. If anyone says they can alter the result you have a valid point but when a former England captain (who did play the game) says the umpire clearly needed to raise his finger , along with many others , it is clearly a story.

This is getting silly, judging by some of the post here makes me wonder just how many have ever played the game. Everybody who has knows that the umpire’s ruling is right even if you think it wasn’t. Referrals rules are well known without the need for further explanation. The umpire in question never had the luxury of seeing the reply slowed down; he had to make an instant decision which was ‘Not Out’. Both England and Australia have suffered from bad decisions but we have to except them . Trying to alter the result is futile, the games over, England won and Australia lost, end of story.