So you're saying there has to be zero doubt to give something out?Since when has there been a hmmm not sure but I'll give it out rule.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.

So you're saying there has to be zero doubt to give something out?Since when has there been a hmmm not sure but I'll give it out rule.
So you're saying there has to be zero doubt to give something out?
Log in to remove this Banner Ad
On a 3rd umpire decision, yesSo you're saying there has to be zero doubt to give something out?
Having about 8 times the population helps thoughJust realized the Bangladesh cricket has 300,000 more likes on FB than cricket Australia.

I don't know if there are official guidelines for third umpires either. Benefit of the doubt to the batsman has always been a convention but is not in the rules. I would have given that out on balance of probabilities but it wasn't clear cut.My understanding is in a stumping or run out, the benefit goes with the batsman. Either way i'm pretty sure having nothing conclusive is pretty ******* important when deciding to give a bloke out.
Nigel Llong the pommy piece of shit gave Johnson out with no clear way of telling and the Paki's wasted a review on O'KeefeWhat's happening? Don't have fox where I am at the moment.
You would be saying the same thing if he hadn't reviewed it.typical siddle lol...2 reviews, 2 completely wrong
You would be saying the same thing if he hadn't reviewed it.
I mean, it's pretty simple in this case isn't it? Do you think something was grounded behind the line? If so, not out. If not, out.I don't know if there are official guidelines for third umpires either. Benefit of the doubt to the batsman has always been a convention but is not in the rules. I would have given that out on balance of probabilities but it wasn't clear cut.
