Circumstances in which a Player Review may be requested
a) A player may request a review of any decision taken by the on-field umpires concerning whether or not a batsman is dismissed, with the exception of "Timed Out" (Player Review).
b) For the avoidance of doubt, no other decisions made by the umpires are eligible for a Player Review.
c) Only the batsman involved in a dismissal may request a Player Review of an "Out" decision and only the captain (or acting captain) of the fielding team may request a Player Review of a "Not Out" decision.
d) A decision concerning whether or not a batsman is dismissed that could have been the subject of a Umpire Review under paragraph 2 is eligible for a Player Review as soon as it is clear that the on-field umpire has chosen not to initiate the Umpire Review.
The manner of requesting the Player Review
a) The request should be made by the player making a „T‟ sign with both forearms at head height.
b) The total time elapsed between the ball becoming dead and the review request being made should be no more than a few seconds. If the umpires believe that a request has not been made sufficiently promptly, they may at their discretion decline to review the decision.
c) The captain may consult with the bowler and other fielders or the two batsmen may consult with each other prior to deciding whether to request a Player Review. However in order to meet the requirement of (b) above, such consultation will need to occur almost instantly and be very brief. Under no circumstances is any player permitted to query an umpire about any aspect of a decision before deciding on whether or not to request a Player Review. If the umpires believe that the captain or batsman has received direct or indirect input emanating other than from the players on the field, then they may at their discretion decline the request for a Player Review. In particular, signals from the dressing room must not be given.
d) No replays, either at normal speed or slow motion, should be shown on a big screen to spectators until either the next delivery has been bowled or the players have left the field.
e) If either on-field umpire initiates an Umpire Review under paragraph 2, this does not preclude a player seeking a Player Review of a separate incident from the same delivery. The Player Review request may be made after the Umpire Review provided it is still within the timescale described in (b) above. (See 3.8 (b) and 3.8 (c) below for the process for addressing both an Umpire and Player Review)
f) A request for a Player Review may not be withdrawn once it has been made.
The process of consultation
a) On receipt of an eligible and timely request for a Player Review, the on-field umpire will make the signof a television with his hands in the normal way.
b) He will initiate communication with the third umpire by confirming the decision that has been made and that the player has requested a Player Review.
c) The third umpire must then work alone, independent of outside help or comment, other than when consulting the on-field umpire.
d) A two-way consultation process should begin to investigate whether there is anything that the third umpire can see or hear which would indicate that the on-field umpire should change his decision.
e) This consultation should be on points of fact, where possible phrased in a manner leading to yes or no answers. Questions requiring a single answer based on a series of judgements, such as "do you think that was LBW?" are to be avoided.
f) The third umpire shall not withhold any factual information which may help in the decision making process, even if the information is not directly prompted by the on-field umpire‟s questions. In particular, in reviewing a dismissal, if the third umpire believes that the batsman may instead be out by any other mode of dismissal, he shall advise the on-field umpire accordingly. The process of consultation described in this paragraph in respect of such other mode of dismissal shall then be conducted as if the batsman has been given not out.
g) The third umpire should initially check whether the delivery is fair under Law 24.5 („fair delivery - the feet‟) and under Clause 42.4.2(a) („full toss passing above waist height‟), where appropriate advising the on-field umpire accordingly.
h) If despite the available technology, the third umpire is unable to answer with a high degree of confidence a particular question posed by the on-field umpire, then he shouldreport that the replays are „inconclusive‟. The third umpire should not give answers conveying likelihoods or probabilities.
i) Specifically when advising on LBW decisions, the requirement for a high degree of
confidence should be interpreted as follows:
*With regard to determining the point of pitching the evidence provided by technology
should be regarded as definitive and the Laws as interpreted in clause 3.9 (a) below
should be strictly applied.
*With regard to the point of impact
If a "not out" decision is being reviewed, in order to report that the point of impact
is between wicket and wicket (i.e. in line with the stumps), the evidence provided
by technology should show that the centre of the ball at the moment of interception
is between wicket and wicket.
If an "out" decision is being reviewed, in order to report that the point of impact is
not between wicket and wicket (i.e. outside the line of the stumps), the evidence
provided by technology should show that no part of the ball at the moment of
interception is between wicket and wicket.
*With regard to determining whether the ball was likely to have hit the stumps:
If a "not out" decision is being reviewed, in order to report that the ball is hitting the
stumps, the evidence provided by technology should show that the centre of the ball would have hit the stumps within an area demarcated by a line drawn below the lower edge of the bails and down the middle of the outer stumps.
However, in instances where the evidence shows that the ball would have hit the stumps within the demarcated area as set out above but that the point of impact is
greater than 250 cm from the stumps, the third umpire shall notify the on-field
umpire of:
a) The distance from the wickets to the point of impact with the batsman
b) The approximate distance from point of pitching to point of impact
c) Where the ball is predicted to hit the stumps.
In such a case, the on-field umpire shall have regard to the normal cricketing principles concerning the level of certainty in making his decision as to whether to change his decision.
If an "out" decision is being reviewed, in order to report that the ball is missing the
stumps, the evidence of the technology should show that no part of the ball would
have made contact with any part of the stumps or bails.
j) The on-field umpire must then make his decision based on those factual questions that were
answered by the third umpire, any other factual information offered by the third umpire and
his recollection and opinion of the original incident.
k) The on-field umpire will reverse his decision if the nature of the supplementaryinformation
received from the third umpire leads him to conclude that his original decision was
incorrect.
The process for communicating the final decision
a) When the on-field umpire has reached a decision, he should advise the TV director (directly or via the third umpire).
b) For Player Reviews concerning potential dismissals, he should then indicate "Out" by raising his finger above his head in a normal yet prominent manner or indicate "Not Out" by the call of "not out" and by crossing his hands in a horizontal position side to side in front and above his waist three times (as per a "safe" decision in baseball). Where the decision is a reversal of the on-field umpire's previous decision, he should make the "revoke last signal" indication immediately prior to the above.
c) If the mode of dismissal is not obvious or not the same as that on which the original
decision was based, then the umpire should advise the official scorers via the third umpire.
Number of Player Review requests permitted
a) Each team is allowed to make two unsuccessful Player Review requests per innings. If a Player Review results in the umpire reversing his original decision, then the request has been successful and does not count towards the innings limit. If the umpire‟s decision is unchanged, the Player Review is unsuccessful. After two unsuccessful requests by one team, no further Player Review requests will be allowed by that team during the current innings.
b) If following a Player Review, an umpire upholds a decision of „Out‟, but for a different mode of dismissal from that for which the original decision was given, then the request will still be regarded as unsuccessful.
c) If a Player Review and an Umpire Review occur from the same delivery and the decision from the Umpire Review renders the Player Review unnecessary (see 3.8 (b) and 3.8 (c)), then the Player Review request will be ignored and not be counted as unsuccessful.
d) The third umpire shall be responsible for counting the number of unsuccessful Player Reviews and advising the on-field umpires once either team has exhausted their allowance for that innings.
e) The scoreboard shall display, for the innings in progress, the number of Player Reviews remaining available to each team.
Use of technology
a) The following technology may be used by the third umpire.
*Slow motion replays from all available cameras
*Super slow motion replays from all available cameras
*Ultra motion camera replays from all available cameras
*Sound from the stump microphones with the replays at normal speed and slow motion
*Approved ball tracking technology
*The mat, generated by the provider of ball tracking technology, not by the broadcaster
*Hot Spot cameras
*In addition, other forms of technology may be used subject to ICC being satisfied that
the required standards of accuracy and time efficiency can be met.
b) Where practical usage or further testing indicates that any of the above forms of technology cannot reliably provide accurate and timely information, then it may be removed prior to or during a match. The final decision regarding the technology to be used in a given match will be taken by the Match Referee in consultation with ICC Management and the competing teams‟ governing bodies.
Interpretation of Laws
a) When using technology to determine where the ball pitched (as per Law 36.1(b)), the third umpire should refer to the "point" (or centre) of the ball. Therefore if at least 50% of the ball pitches outside the line of leg stump, then no LBW dismissal is possible.
b) When using a replay to determine the moment at which the wicket has been put down (as per Law 28.1), the third umpire should deem this to be the first frame in which one of the bails is shown (or can be deduced) to have lost all contact with the top of the stumps and subsequent frames show the bail permanently removed from the top of the stumps.
a) A player may request a review of any decision taken by the on-field umpires concerning whether or not a batsman is dismissed, with the exception of "Timed Out" (Player Review).
b) For the avoidance of doubt, no other decisions made by the umpires are eligible for a Player Review.
c) Only the batsman involved in a dismissal may request a Player Review of an "Out" decision and only the captain (or acting captain) of the fielding team may request a Player Review of a "Not Out" decision.
d) A decision concerning whether or not a batsman is dismissed that could have been the subject of a Umpire Review under paragraph 2 is eligible for a Player Review as soon as it is clear that the on-field umpire has chosen not to initiate the Umpire Review.
The manner of requesting the Player Review
b) The total time elapsed between the ball becoming dead and the review request being made should be no more than a few seconds. If the umpires believe that a request has not been made sufficiently promptly, they may at their discretion decline to review the decision.
c) The captain may consult with the bowler and other fielders or the two batsmen may consult with each other prior to deciding whether to request a Player Review. However in order to meet the requirement of (b) above, such consultation will need to occur almost instantly and be very brief. Under no circumstances is any player permitted to query an umpire about any aspect of a decision before deciding on whether or not to request a Player Review. If the umpires believe that the captain or batsman has received direct or indirect input emanating other than from the players on the field, then they may at their discretion decline the request for a Player Review. In particular, signals from the dressing room must not be given.
d) No replays, either at normal speed or slow motion, should be shown on a big screen to spectators until either the next delivery has been bowled or the players have left the field.
e) If either on-field umpire initiates an Umpire Review under paragraph 2, this does not preclude a player seeking a Player Review of a separate incident from the same delivery. The Player Review request may be made after the Umpire Review provided it is still within the timescale described in (b) above. (See 3.8 (b) and 3.8 (c) below for the process for addressing both an Umpire and Player Review)
f) A request for a Player Review may not be withdrawn once it has been made.
The process of consultation
b) He will initiate communication with the third umpire by confirming the decision that has been made and that the player has requested a Player Review.
c) The third umpire must then work alone, independent of outside help or comment, other than when consulting the on-field umpire.
d) A two-way consultation process should begin to investigate whether there is anything that the third umpire can see or hear which would indicate that the on-field umpire should change his decision.
e) This consultation should be on points of fact, where possible phrased in a manner leading to yes or no answers. Questions requiring a single answer based on a series of judgements, such as "do you think that was LBW?" are to be avoided.
f) The third umpire shall not withhold any factual information which may help in the decision making process, even if the information is not directly prompted by the on-field umpire‟s questions. In particular, in reviewing a dismissal, if the third umpire believes that the batsman may instead be out by any other mode of dismissal, he shall advise the on-field umpire accordingly. The process of consultation described in this paragraph in respect of such other mode of dismissal shall then be conducted as if the batsman has been given not out.
g) The third umpire should initially check whether the delivery is fair under Law 24.5 („fair delivery - the feet‟) and under Clause 42.4.2(a) („full toss passing above waist height‟), where appropriate advising the on-field umpire accordingly.
h) If despite the available technology, the third umpire is unable to answer with a high degree of confidence a particular question posed by the on-field umpire, then he shouldreport that the replays are „inconclusive‟. The third umpire should not give answers conveying likelihoods or probabilities.
i) Specifically when advising on LBW decisions, the requirement for a high degree of
confidence should be interpreted as follows:
*With regard to determining the point of pitching the evidence provided by technology
should be regarded as definitive and the Laws as interpreted in clause 3.9 (a) below
should be strictly applied.
*With regard to the point of impact
If a "not out" decision is being reviewed, in order to report that the point of impact
is between wicket and wicket (i.e. in line with the stumps), the evidence provided
by technology should show that the centre of the ball at the moment of interception
is between wicket and wicket.
If an "out" decision is being reviewed, in order to report that the point of impact is
not between wicket and wicket (i.e. outside the line of the stumps), the evidence
provided by technology should show that no part of the ball at the moment of
interception is between wicket and wicket.
*With regard to determining whether the ball was likely to have hit the stumps:
If a "not out" decision is being reviewed, in order to report that the ball is hitting the
stumps, the evidence provided by technology should show that the centre of the ball would have hit the stumps within an area demarcated by a line drawn below the lower edge of the bails and down the middle of the outer stumps.
However, in instances where the evidence shows that the ball would have hit the stumps within the demarcated area as set out above but that the point of impact is
greater than 250 cm from the stumps, the third umpire shall notify the on-field
umpire of:
a) The distance from the wickets to the point of impact with the batsman
b) The approximate distance from point of pitching to point of impact
c) Where the ball is predicted to hit the stumps.
In such a case, the on-field umpire shall have regard to the normal cricketing principles concerning the level of certainty in making his decision as to whether to change his decision.
If an "out" decision is being reviewed, in order to report that the ball is missing the
stumps, the evidence of the technology should show that no part of the ball would
have made contact with any part of the stumps or bails.
j) The on-field umpire must then make his decision based on those factual questions that were
answered by the third umpire, any other factual information offered by the third umpire and
his recollection and opinion of the original incident.
k) The on-field umpire will reverse his decision if the nature of the supplementaryinformation
received from the third umpire leads him to conclude that his original decision was
incorrect.
The process for communicating the final decision
a) When the on-field umpire has reached a decision, he should advise the TV director (directly or via the third umpire).
c) If the mode of dismissal is not obvious or not the same as that on which the original
decision was based, then the umpire should advise the official scorers via the third umpire.
Number of Player Review requests permitted
a) Each team is allowed to make two unsuccessful Player Review requests per innings. If a Player Review results in the umpire reversing his original decision, then the request has been successful and does not count towards the innings limit. If the umpire‟s decision is unchanged, the Player Review is unsuccessful. After two unsuccessful requests by one team, no further Player Review requests will be allowed by that team during the current innings.
b) If following a Player Review, an umpire upholds a decision of „Out‟, but for a different mode of dismissal from that for which the original decision was given, then the request will still be regarded as unsuccessful.
c) If a Player Review and an Umpire Review occur from the same delivery and the decision from the Umpire Review renders the Player Review unnecessary (see 3.8 (b) and 3.8 (c)), then the Player Review request will be ignored and not be counted as unsuccessful.
d) The third umpire shall be responsible for counting the number of unsuccessful Player Reviews and advising the on-field umpires once either team has exhausted their allowance for that innings.
e) The scoreboard shall display, for the innings in progress, the number of Player Reviews remaining available to each team.
Use of technology
a) The following technology may be used by the third umpire.
*Slow motion replays from all available cameras
*Super slow motion replays from all available cameras
*Ultra motion camera replays from all available cameras
*Sound from the stump microphones with the replays at normal speed and slow motion
*Approved ball tracking technology
*The mat, generated by the provider of ball tracking technology, not by the broadcaster
*Hot Spot cameras
*In addition, other forms of technology may be used subject to ICC being satisfied that
the required standards of accuracy and time efficiency can be met.
b) Where practical usage or further testing indicates that any of the above forms of technology cannot reliably provide accurate and timely information, then it may be removed prior to or during a match. The final decision regarding the technology to be used in a given match will be taken by the Match Referee in consultation with ICC Management and the competing teams‟ governing bodies.
Interpretation of Laws
a) When using technology to determine where the ball pitched (as per Law 36.1(b)), the third umpire should refer to the "point" (or centre) of the ball. Therefore if at least 50% of the ball pitches outside the line of leg stump, then no LBW dismissal is possible.
b) When using a replay to determine the moment at which the wicket has been put down (as per Law 28.1), the third umpire should deem this to be the first frame in which one of the bails is shown (or can be deduced) to have lost all contact with the top of the stumps and subsequent frames show the bail permanently removed from the top of the stumps.
No comments:
Post a Comment