There was a very good article about it on cricinfo. But I can't find it.

Over 500,000 households in Australia threw their TV's out of the window after that dismissal. The rest of the country used a hammer.

Duncan. They only possible question the umpres can ask each other is weather the batmen hit the ball. What other question could it be?

Dunc/Boss, as I said above change the terminology and it would have been not out.
When people here DRS got it wrong they assume you mean the technology when in fact it's the ICC's terminology. Change "conclusive Evidence" to "beyond reasonable doubt" and implement the quicker snicko and this would not have happened

What dunc is saying is that as the 3rd umpire couldn't say he 100% didn't hit it then he can't overturn

I'm not saying scrap DRS, I like it.

Problems are:

2 review per team, should be 1

3rd umpire should make decision himself

On field umpires call for LBW should be replaced with Not out

There are probably others

http://www.espncricinfo.com/blogs/content/story/654847.html

Is it this?

I'm just going to walk the dog, I'll catch you all in a bit.

Hmmm but the evidence clearly states he didn't hit it. These 3 umpires have.been pathetic since the series has started. They should be getting the sack.

Yes Adot

interesting read, however to me conclusive evidence and a high degree of confidence are pretty much the same

Give Tony Hill a knighthood

this is the problem with DRS. it always takes the limelight of the good cricket away. When bad decisions are made through DRS, we have debates on that for a month. when good decisions are made, we have another 2-3 weeks blasting on people that are against DRS. and with all this we forget the cricket.

I've said it before and I'll say it again. The ICC should change the law. "Conclusive evidence" Get rid of those words and put "If the decision is wrong, overturn it" Simple you numpties. If it's wrong, it's wrong. The umpires look at the dismissals with the ICC law ingrained in their heads and follow that rather than SIMPLICITY.

Tony Hill, the most competent third umpire ever. Please dont say a word about him

The third umpire is the SL umpire.

Adot what if they can't tell whether it's right or wrong from the evidence? Cricket isn't a simple game

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

Oh is it d sri lankan guy, I seriously don't get it. Why not just give them snicko as well. No common sense what so ever with any dec.

it's the grey areas where "it looks like he did/didn't hit it"?

abu at present snicko takes too long to produce, but there is talk of it coming into DRS with a break through meaning it only takes 5 seconds to produce

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

Do you lot think the problem with hotspots which has came out in public played the part on third umpires head but this was spin hotspot is much more accurate

No, but you can change the law from "conclusive evidence" to something else, right? For me the words "Conclusive evidence" plays a part in the Umpires making mistakes, aswell as their ineptness.

yeah, as i said above i'd like it changed to beyond reasonable doubt. which leaves a bit more room ro manouver, but not too much

davidoff what about balance of probability rather than reasonable doubt