Cricket Forum | Cricket Discussion Forum | Cricket : Pietersen Catch http://www.cricketworld.com/forum/ This is an XML content feed of; Cricket Forum | Cricket Discussion Forum | Cricket : World Cup 2007 : Pietersen Catch Copyright (c) 2006-2009 Web Wiz Forums - All Rights Reserved. Thu, 23 May 2013 10:32:06 +0000 Thu, 12 Apr 2007 03:10:14 +0000 http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss Web Wiz Forums 9.71 360 www.cricketworld.com/forum/RSS_post_feed.asp?TID=3461 Cricket Forum | Cricket Discussion Forum | Cricket http://www.cricketworld.com/forum/forum_images/logo.png http://www.cricketworld.com/forum/ Pietersen Catch : I guess that happens when a team... http://www.cricketworld.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=3461&PID=125476#125476 Author: 143no
Subject: 3461
Posted: 12 April 2007 at 3:10am

I guess that happens when a team only creates half the amount of chances.]]> Thu, 12 Apr 2007 03:10:14 +0000 http://www.cricketworld.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=3461&PID=125476#125476 Pietersen Catch : We've dropped less than your... http://www.cricketworld.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=3461&PID=125351#125351 Author: Sledger
Subject: 3461
Posted: 11 April 2007 at 8:45am

We've dropped less than your mob matey - go check the thread!]]> Wed, 11 Apr 2007 08:45:05 +0000 http://www.cricketworld.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=3461&PID=125351#125351 Pietersen Catch : of course sledger I just took... http://www.cricketworld.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=3461&PID=125345#125345 Author: 143no
Subject: 3461
Posted: 11 April 2007 at 7:16am

of course sledger I just took that as read, I forgot we are talking about english feilders.]]> Wed, 11 Apr 2007 07:16:17 +0000 http://www.cricketworld.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=3461&PID=125345#125345 Pietersen Catch : As long as the other fella caught... http://www.cricketworld.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=3461&PID=125340#125340 Author: Sledger
Subject: 3461
Posted: 11 April 2007 at 6:01am

As long as the other fella caught it 143 !!]]> Wed, 11 Apr 2007 06:01:55 +0000 http://www.cricketworld.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=3461&PID=125340#125340 Pietersen Catch : It would also have been out if... http://www.cricketworld.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=3461&PID=125290#125290 Author: 143no
Subject: 3461
Posted: 10 April 2007 at 4:03pm

It would also have been out if he had thrown it to another feilder.

]]> Tue, 10 Apr 2007 16:03:04 +0000 http://www.cricketworld.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=3461&PID=125290#125290 Pietersen Catch : If he releases the ball from within... http://www.cricketworld.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=3461&PID=125212#125212 Author: Sledger
Subject: 3461
Posted: 10 April 2007 at 8:08am

If he releases the ball from within the field of play then it would be out.]]> Tue, 10 Apr 2007 08:08:15 +0000 http://www.cricketworld.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=3461&PID=125212#125212 Pietersen Catch : What would happen in the following... http://www.cricketworld.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=3461&PID=125210#125210 Author: Mojo
Subject: 3461
Posted: 10 April 2007 at 7:59am

What would happen in the following case?:
The fielder catches the ball just inside the boundary rope, but is going backwards towards the rope. The fielder then throws the ball upwards and inwards before stepping over the rope. He then regains control of himself, and runs back into the field to catch the ball again before it hits the ground.
 
Is that out or not-out?
]]> Tue, 10 Apr 2007 07:59:08 +0000 http://www.cricketworld.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=3461&PID=125210#125210 Pietersen Catch : Right Bondy , it wasn't out.... http://www.cricketworld.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=3461&PID=125208#125208 Author: Sledger
Subject: 3461
Posted: 10 April 2007 at 7:47am

Right Bondy , it wasn't out.  Imagine the hoohaa though if it'd been the last wicket and not the 4th!!]]> Tue, 10 Apr 2007 07:47:16 +0000 http://www.cricketworld.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=3461&PID=125208#125208 Pietersen Catch : It was clearly not out. The rule... http://www.cricketworld.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=3461&PID=125190#125190 Author: bondy
Subject: 3461
Posted: 09 April 2007 at 10:30pm

It was clearly not out. The rule states you have to be in control of your body, as well as the ball.
 
He was not in control of his body illustrated by the fact that he couldn't stabilize his movement.
]]> Mon, 09 Apr 2007 22:30:42 +0000 http://www.cricketworld.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=3461&PID=125190#125190 Pietersen Catch : Changing the rules to allow players... http://www.cricketworld.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=3461&PID=125113#125113 Author: Roscoe
Subject: 3461
Posted: 09 April 2007 at 11:23am

Changing the rules to allow players to run out of bounds under certain conditions would make them unnecessarily hard to enforce, given that this happens so rarely.]]> Mon, 09 Apr 2007 11:23:39 +0000 http://www.cricketworld.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=3461&PID=125113#125113 Pietersen Catch : There was an incident a couple... http://www.cricketworld.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=3461&PID=125110#125110 Author: Clobber
Subject: 3461
Posted: 09 April 2007 at 10:59am

There was an incident a couple of seasons ago at Leics where Brad Hodge took a catch running towards the boundary and depending on who you believe either he carried it over the boundary so it should have been not out (the view of the batsman, Dominic Cork, who publicly labelled Hodge a cheat), or it was under control and he simply ran over the boundary to celebrate with the crowd (Hodge's view, one shared by the umpires on this occasion).]]> Mon, 09 Apr 2007 10:59:45 +0000 http://www.cricketworld.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=3461&PID=125110#125110 Pietersen Catch : By the rule of the law its not... http://www.cricketworld.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=3461&PID=125109#125109 Author: Kerm
Subject: 3461
Posted: 09 April 2007 at 10:56am

By the rule of the law its not out but I dont know, looked pretty decent to me.

He caught it running in from the boundary, took one step an inch insidethe boundary rope, then three more steps, then tossed it back into thefield of play before going over the rope.

Technecially not out but like has been said, anywhere else on the pitchand it would have been given. I think Vaughan had a bit of a heatedchat with the umpires about getting it referred but they didn't.

Personally i'd say as long as you have full control over the ball i.eyour not deflecting it upwards. As long as you have the ball in handand its in safely then that should be ok as a catch but being incontrol of your movements is a tad ambiguous.
]]> Mon, 09 Apr 2007 10:56:34 +0000 http://www.cricketworld.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=3461&PID=125109#125109 Pietersen Catch : I didn't see it but Ian Chappell... http://www.cricketworld.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=3461&PID=125106#125106 Author: Clobber
Subject: 3461
Posted: 09 April 2007 at 10:44am

I didn't see it but Ian Chappell certainly thought it should have counted as a catch]]> Mon, 09 Apr 2007 10:44:19 +0000 http://www.cricketworld.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=3461&PID=125106#125106 Pietersen Catch : I know that according to the current... http://www.cricketworld.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=3461&PID=125105#125105 Author: diggler
Subject: 3461
Posted: 09 April 2007 at 10:38am

I know that according to the current rules, the Pieterson catch from Symonds was not valid, but is it a good rule?  If he made the same catch anywhere else on the field and threw it in the air, as often happens, no one would question it.  I don't like the rule.  I think all you should need is to control the ball inside the boundary
 
By the way, it is not that I'm a sore loser because I'm an Aussie.
]]> Mon, 09 Apr 2007 10:38:37 +0000 http://www.cricketworld.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=3461&PID=125105#125105