Player reviews for wides and no-balls: yay or nay?



The ESPNcricinfo crew discuss if the introduction for these reviews make sense or not.

Subscribe to ESPNcricinfo: http://bit.ly/1jnGh6S

Get our apps:
Android: http://bit.ly/2vFVfzX
iOS: http://apple.co/2vGj8rg

Website: http://www.espncricinfo.com/

You can also find us at:

https://www.facebook.com/Cricinfo
https://twitter.com/ESPNcricinfo
https://www.instagram.com/espncricinfo/

source

10 comments

  1. Don't worry guys. The process of Wide reviewing will quicken up like Front Foot No Ball is quick by 3rd Umpires

  2. So loud last 10 seconds of ESPNCRICINFO logo. Too much loud. Decrease volume

  3. Too much time between review kill the momentum of batters

  4. The continuing decline of the on field umpire has led to this.of late some of the calls were absolutely horrendous.the immunity of the umpires need to be debated.the stakes are far too high

  5. Today's cricket experts overanalyzing cricket.same talk in every match.thats why cricket experts sucks now days.i only watch cricket.these kind of bull shit analysis is a garbage.

  6. I didn't like that review thing If you are going to review for everything then what's the role of umpire

  7. The batsmen is reviewing for a wide and the third umpire is also checking whether they nicked the ball? Even after the review the third umpire got it wrong in the last over. Hope they don’t consider umpires call for this too.
    That’s the most pathetic thing I’ve seen.
    Also if it’s a stumping review just check for the stumping.

  8. I didn't like it either really time consuming and no guarantee tshirt umpire will give the right call