Barclay Shield 2025/26

Top Contributors
Can anyone shed any light on the Epping Vs Rosanna game. PlayHQ still has the game as live and no official result is in. I've heard it was a draw but I've also heard a protest has been lodged.
 
Interesting one. There was a questionable umpiring/scoring decision during the Epping innings. A ball was bowled by Shelton which was hit by the batsman. The umpire made an unusual gesture with his arms which the scorers thought was potentially indicating a wide. The scorers counted the wide and Epping eventually scored 142. The Rosanna players were only made aware during their chase. Rosanna went on to make 142. Upon completion the umpire was questioned about the particular ball in question and confirmed it was clearly not a wide given the batsman had hit the ball. The umpires seemed happy to correct the clerical error and reduce Epping’s score immediately after walking off but decided there were a couple of small discrepancies between iPad and scorebook which needed to also be checked before finalising.
 
wheeeels said:
Interesting one. There was a questionable umpiring/scoring decision during the Epping innings. A ball was bowled by Shelton which was hit by the batsman. The umpire made an unusual gesture with his arms which the scorers thought was potentially indicating a wide. The scorers counted the wide and Epping eventually scored 142. The Rosanna players were only made aware during their chase. Rosanna went on to make 142. Upon completion the umpire was questioned about the particular ball in question and confirmed it was clearly not a wide given the batsman had hit the ball. The umpires seemed happy to correct the clerical error and reduce Epping’s score immediately after walking off but decided there were a couple of small discrepancies between iPad and scorebook which needed to also be checked before finalising.
Click to expand...
Re : the over in question, would not the Scorers have yelled out to the umpire that there was still one ball to be bowled in the over given they had written down a wide ball, the umpire thinking it was a fair ball called over but the scorers would have been one ball short
 
The scorers waited to see how many balls were bowled in the over, the extra ball would in theory confirm the wide. There was a 7th legal delivery bowled in the over (which ended up being a no ball and 1 off the bat) so the scorers believed that would confirm the earlier wide call. What this situation also meant is that where the scorers would typically inform the umpires before the extra legal delivery is bowled, they instead took that as confirmation of the wide.
 
Technically Epping’s score should have been 139 if only 6 legal deliveries were scored however the non-wide and surplus legal delivery which accounted for 2 runs pushed their total to 142. The extra legal delivery and resulting runs cannot be disputed by the laws of the game, but a clerical error on the other hand…
 
Have just watched the footage of that particular over in question. The umpires arms do indeed look like a signal for a wide despite Emmins hitting the ball. But a 7th ball is bowled and a no ball in bowled on that 7th ball which makes it an 8 ball over. By the looks of footage noone from Rosanna asked the question in play. Looks to be an umpire error as 8 balls are definitely bowled allowing the extra ball for the apparent wide. Both umpires surely checked off on scorebook at tea and Rosanna were aware that 143 was to win.

I've also heard that there was not 1 mention of the incident until the end of the game when it was in fact a draw and Rosanna sooked up about the wide. But again I've only been told that by people who were in attendance. Surely if the wide was that debateable it would have been brought up at the tea break and not post game
 
I would argue that any ‘wide’ that is hit by a batsman is debatable. When you’re only made aware an hour after a change of innings that it was actually scored as a wide, then at what point should you alert the umpires?

There was never an argument that Rosanna themselves scored any more runs, just confirmation that Epping clearly scored less, as confirmed by the umpires.

If it can be clearly proven that one team scores less runs then isn’t that the whole point of being able to dispute a score?
 
Last edited:
Surely it just goes down as an "umpire error" as the umpires are the ones that indeed made the error and allowed an 8 ball over to be bowled. Again watch the footage of the over in question (16th over and I personally believe it's an umpire error.

I see the result is now finally complete and the original draw has stood. At least Epping were able to get past 54 this time and give themselves a chance at a win.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top