Pieterson plumb LBW with a full toss by Lee but was not given out, why not?

Pieterson plumb LBW with a full toss by Lee but was not given out, why not?

Post by Mal » Tue, 26 Jul 2005 18:34:06


Pieterson plumb LBW with a full toss by Lee but was not given out, why
not?

Heard the commentators say it was a beam ball.
A beam ball that hits on the knee is a missed oppatuneity by the
batsman to smack it to the fence or into the stand.

Could have only hit the stumps half way up.

Hardly a beam ball. Beam balls are above the waist or up near the
head. If the unpire thought it was a beam ball then he should have
called it a nno ball from square leg.

Umpiring was not the best. Langer out for 40 in the first innings, a
clear no ball that was not called by the umpire. Saw a few others that
were out off no balls that were never called.

 
 
 

Pieterson plumb LBW with a full toss by Lee but was not given out, why not?

Post by dechuck » Tue, 26 Jul 2005 18:40:39


Quote:

> Pieterson plumb LBW with a full toss by Lee but was not given out, why
> not?

> Heard the commentators say it was a beam ball.
> A beam ball that hits on the knee is a missed oppatuneity by the
> batsman to smack it to the fence or into the stand.

> Could have only hit the stumps half way up.

> Hardly a beam ball. Beam balls are above the waist or up near the
> head. If the unpire thought it was a beam ball then he should have
> called it a nno ball from square leg.

> Umpiring was not the best. Langer out for 40 in the first innings, a
> clear no ball that was not called by the umpire. Saw a few others that
> were out off no balls that were never called.

As discussed in othere threads the Umpire lost the trajectory of the ball,
he apologised to Lee later

- Show quoted text -