Even before collecting the ball Sangakkar had removed the bails but third umpire's verdict was "out" and Symonds had to go! The commentators were unanimous in claiming it as not out. The 3rd umpire either lacked cricket knowledge or has a poor eye sight.
Re: Was it a real hattrick?
by Ashish Maheshwari on May 18, 2009 03:06 PM
he removed one bail without ball in hand and second with ball in hand, hence Symond was out. It was right decission
Re: Re: Was it a real hattrick?
by Dhirendra Negi on May 18, 2009 03:16 PM
U dont know cricket. If a bail is dislodged, u have to uproot stumps to call a runout or stump
Re: Re: Re: Was it a real hattrick?
by Manish Bhakhri on May 18, 2009 03:25 PM
You have to remove the stumps out of the ground in case both bails are dislodged. In symonds case, one bail was still intact which sangakara removed with the ball in hand. So its OUT. Guys before putting any comments please put some thought into it.
Re: Re: Re: Was it a real hattrick?
by Lalit Kumar on May 18, 2009 03:23 PM
If one bail is there on stumps then its not required to remove stumps but u have to dislodge that bail from stupms and it was same case this time so it was out.
Re: Was it a real hattrick?
by tarzaan on May 18, 2009 04:02 PM
Ramdas...still one of the bails were present and hence by the rules of cricket the 3rd umpire was correct.......I think u either lack cricket knowledge or have a poor eye sight.
Re: rubbish
by chinmay on May 18, 2009 02:58 PM
Mr mohammad , dont compare your country to us.yes we have poverty but becouse of that people are not coming to your nation.and you cant imagine your constructions field without our workforce. In development their is two type development flow devlopment and rapid devlopment.if we come to our nation it is showing flow devlopment that mean social status getting strong year by year.and second one is rapid devlopment means it defend on one sector or a service.it show high degree devlopment within short period. defendinfg on a one sector that is unique in the world. in your nation that is oil. but when we compere both of these devlopment flow is better becouse every sector here shows devlopment.but in rapid development it extermly defend on a sector when it loose it market then the state goes to road. show me one thing that you can say proudly this technology is belongs to us...we are bieng devloping country we can show you many many thigs which belong to us...
Re: rubbish
by deewaker pandey on May 18, 2009 02:34 PM
its a different matter whether hw the indians r spending the money. bt if indians will nt b in ur country, then the economy of ur country wll go down n u wll nt b in a same position as u r now. so b4 speaking think widely otherwise pls shut ur mouth. thnks
Re: rubbish
by Mayank Gupta on May 18, 2009 02:41 PM
do you know about India???????? crores of people from bangladesh living in india. They dont have food and they come here every year. Many people from pakistan,nepal and other countries living in India without Visa but India feed to everyone.
I think now people have understood why Dhoni is giving bowl to Yuvi rather than Sehwag. Even Sehwag don't have confidence on himself and not bowling in IPL.
Re: Viru VS Yuvi as a bowler.....
by Ramdas Nayak on May 18, 2009 03:03 PM
Why Dhoni is not using Rohit Sharma? Do you have an answer? In IPL batsmen get out mostly because of their own fault than bowler's effort. Did u forget how Yuvi was humbled by Mascerenhas in England by hitting 5 sixes in an over!!
Re: Re: Viru VS Yuvi as a bowler.....
by Anurag Rathore on May 18, 2009 03:17 PM
Rohit is not a permanent member of ODI side. He is giving first preference to Yusuf as off-spinner rather than Sehwag/Rohit. While Yuvraj is alone left arm spinner in the team. He is getting secong preference. Why Sehwag is not bowling in IPL? Can you give me answer.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Viru VS Yuvi as a bowler.....
by Josh Chadda on May 19, 2009 01:39 AM
Because he has better bowlers than Yuvi has at his disposal. Have you seen Delhi's bowling lineup? Sehwag doesn't have to bowl but Punjab's bowling has been shaky especially the slow bowling thus Yuvraj is bowling.
Also Yuvraj is good option because he is a left arm spinner which gives you better angle against right handers for negative (in leg) bowling for t20.
Sehwag is overall better bowler because he can spin it much better than Yuvraj, however, in T20, you want Yuvraj bowling because pitch doesn' give assistance (generally talking) and ball doesn't spin.
Hopefully that answers your question in detail. Sometimes you have to use your brain. If you can't think this far, you probably shouldn't even be asking these questions. 2 hat-trick's doesn't make Yuvraj good bowler so don't compare numbers like that.
You must believe that Sachin is better batsman than both Kumble and Agarkar, right? However, Sachin hasn't hit 100 on Lords but both the other ones have. That just tells you how statistics can give you wrong picture some times.
Although the batsmen are being praised, but the praise should go to bowlers. They are the part and parcel of there teams existence. The top wicket taker bowlers are pacers but spinners are more important as they decrease the run rate and also take some important wickets. Also, the three hat-tricks goes to spinners. e.g. Yuvraj Singh(2), Rohit sharma(1). And the splended performance by Kumble(RCB), Duminy(MI). This clearly shows that although the south african pitch is meant for pacers but the spinners are doing very on it.
