mas cambios
Active Member
AB de Villiers, his 'catch' and possible effect on the match.
I'm sure by now those of you that care about the South Africa/England series (and a few that don't) will have seen or heard about the 'catch' that was attempted to be claimed by AB de Villiers.
The catch can be described as a chance which was spilled with the ball being pushed along the ground, before de Villiers turned over his palm in order to make it appear like it was a clean catch. Now, in these situations I'm normally fairly forgiving, as I appreciate that a catch can come at speed and often you're not 100% sure if it was taken cleanly or not and most people are happy to admit this. Some people will claim it as they assume it's been taken with touching the ground, others won't.
However, in this case I would have to say that there was there was very little doubt that de Villiers would not have known that the ball was grounded. He made a cynical attempt at fooling the umpires and it was only the fact that Strauss stood his ground that made the umpires question the catch. Thankfully, replays showed what really happened and Strauss continued.
Hopefully some action will be taken against de Villiers, even if it's only a stern talking to. He has played enough cricket to know better (regardless of age or youthful exuberance) and it's something that the game can live without. My biggest gripe though, is the effect that that 'catch' may have had on the game, in particular with the turning down of the chance against Amla by Vaughn.
I truly believe that the earlier act of gamesmanship from de Villiers coloured the umpires decision and they gave the benefit of doubt to the batsman, when, without the earlier hooha, it may well have been given.
What if anything can be done to minimise the risk of this happening and should umpires be allowed to do anything after the close of play? For example, if the tv replays show the catch was good, should they be able to give Amla out?
Your thoughts please.
I'm sure by now those of you that care about the South Africa/England series (and a few that don't) will have seen or heard about the 'catch' that was attempted to be claimed by AB de Villiers.
The catch can be described as a chance which was spilled with the ball being pushed along the ground, before de Villiers turned over his palm in order to make it appear like it was a clean catch. Now, in these situations I'm normally fairly forgiving, as I appreciate that a catch can come at speed and often you're not 100% sure if it was taken cleanly or not and most people are happy to admit this. Some people will claim it as they assume it's been taken with touching the ground, others won't.
However, in this case I would have to say that there was there was very little doubt that de Villiers would not have known that the ball was grounded. He made a cynical attempt at fooling the umpires and it was only the fact that Strauss stood his ground that made the umpires question the catch. Thankfully, replays showed what really happened and Strauss continued.
Hopefully some action will be taken against de Villiers, even if it's only a stern talking to. He has played enough cricket to know better (regardless of age or youthful exuberance) and it's something that the game can live without. My biggest gripe though, is the effect that that 'catch' may have had on the game, in particular with the turning down of the chance against Amla by Vaughn.
I truly believe that the earlier act of gamesmanship from de Villiers coloured the umpires decision and they gave the benefit of doubt to the batsman, when, without the earlier hooha, it may well have been given.
What if anything can be done to minimise the risk of this happening and should umpires be allowed to do anything after the close of play? For example, if the tv replays show the catch was good, should they be able to give Amla out?
Your thoughts please.
