Overall, it’s a roaring success — 120,000 people turning up over three days.19 million prime-time TV viewers across the nation watching Sunday’s last day, far more than normal for the third day of a Test.jpg New Zealand's Brendon McCullum slides to field a ball in front of pigeons during their Test against Australia in Adelaide, Australia.Rival skippers Steve Smith and Brendon McCullum were in unison about the success of the initiative.The national body see day-night cricket along with the luminous pink-ball as the panacea to arrest dwindling interest in the traditional five-day format. McCullum enthused: It’s a great concept.Test cricket got a pulsating makeover as Australia claimed a thrilling three-wicket win over New Zealand in the first Test in the game’s 138-year history to be played under lights. "It’s meant to allow Tests to be played at night and it’s not meant to differ or change how Test cricket is played."The whole Test match was a great innovation, it was a great spectacle, and to get 120,000 people through the gates in three days is absolutely amazing,” said Australia’s Smith.New Zealand's Brendon McCullum slides to field a ball in front of pigeons during their Test against Australia in Adelaide, Australia.

As pink-ball cricket evolves we’ll see the pitches won’t have quite as much grass on them,” he said. The match was the sport's first ever day-night Test. — AP cricket 1. People are voting with their feet."Maybe a little less grass, as a batter at night it was quite difficult,” Lehmann said, but added: "It was exciting.”Prior concerns over the durability and visibility of the pink ball prompted Adelaide ground staff to produce a grassy pitch and square to ensure the newly-designed ball stayed in shape longer. — APMore pink-ball day-night Test matches are planned after the spectacular success of the historic trailblazer at the Adelaide Oval, which won plaudits from fans and players.

I don’t see why not, right time, place and conditions and the fans are calling out for it,” CA chief executive James Sutherland said of the chances of the Gabba getting a pink-ball Test.” The glowing praise appeared to justify Cricket Australia’s bold initiative and is emboldening them to flag the prospect of two more day-night Tests when South Africa and Pakistan tour in 2016.

The crowds loved the experience with a total attendance of 123,736 fans thronging into Adelaide Oval over the three lively days.There were no major problems with the ball and not once was it changed during the three days of play.Host broadcaster, the Nine Network, was also beaming with 3. The opening day gate of 47,441 was the biggest at the Adelaide Test since the famous 1932-33 "bodyline” series.Thirty-seven wickets tumbled in three days as the pink ball dominated the bat, in stark contrast to the run-laden low-attended first two Tests in Brisbane and Perth. I think it’s here to stay, which is great.

The South Australian Cricket Association is already negotiating to host another day-nighter against Pakistan in Adelaide in December 2016, while South Africa are expected to get their first experience of pink ball cricket in Brisbane in the traditional home season opening Test."The Gabba is a good option and have upgraded their # lights, and I would have thought a balmy Test would be a pretty good place to watch cricket. It’s great to see a contest between bat and ball

Hide Comments | Add Comment

As the hosts needed nine runs off three balls, all-rounder Ben Stokes hit the ball into the deep off Trent Boult and ran for a double.New Zealand had set up 242 for England. There's a lot of 'what ifs' and 'what should bes' and 'what could bes' that happen off those 600-plus deliveries. In the end, England were announced as the winner as they had hit more boundaries, 26, as compared to New Zealand's 17 boundaries in the match.

According to the Law 19.As a result, five runs should have been awarded to England and Stokes should have been at the non-striker's end for the next ball. You've got the best two umpires in the elite panel doing the final. The judgment error was the timing of when the fielder threw the ball. They did not cross on their second run, at the instant of the throw."We're not perfect. And that happens every delivery of the game. They forget we make 1000s of decisions every match," he said."They've then got to follow on and see what happens after that, whether there is a run out, whether there's an 'obstructing the field', whether the ball is taken fairly. I think it's unfair to say that the World Cup was decided by that one event. And then they've got to back to see where the two batsmen are," he said.England scripted history as it claimed its first-ever World Cup title. England scripted history as it claimed its first-ever World Cup title. They're doing their best like the other two teams are. As a result, England were awarded six runs - two for a double and four for an overthrow. 

 There's multitudes of decisions to be taken off the one delivery. That's the nature of sport," he said."In this particular case, the umpires have got a lot on their plate, because like every ball, they've had to watch the batsmen complete the first run, they've had to watch the ball being fielded, to understand how it's in play, whether the fielder's done the right thing. So given that scenario, five runs should have been the correct allocation of runs, and Ben Stokes should have been at the non-striker's end for the next delivery," he said.Taufel, who had umpired during the 2011 World Cup final, confirmed that Dharmasena and Marais Erasmus made a mistake. The final will be remembered for ages as it did not have a winner after the 50-over and super over action, both of which were tied. That's the act."There was a judgment error on the overthrow.Taufel, a member of the MCC Laws subcommittee, also said that the umpires did their best and it would be unfair to say that one decision costed New Zealand their maiden victory in the tournament.The retired Australian umpire said that there was a judgment of error as Stokes and Adil Rashid had not crossed for the second run.

Taufel, who had umpired during the 2011 World Cup final, confirmed that # the officiating umpires Kumar Dharmasena and Marais Erasmus made a mistake. In the end, England were announced as the winner as they had hit more boundaries, 26, as compared to New Zealand's 17 boundaries in the match.8 related to an "overthrow or wilful act of fielder", says, "If the boundary results from an overthrow or from the wilful act of a fielder, the runs scored shall be any runs for penalties awarded to either side, and the allowance for the boundary, and the runs completed by the batsmen, together with the run in progress if they had already crossed at the instant of the throw or act. This is just part of the game.Taufel, who was named the International Cricket Council (ICC) Umpire of the Year every year from 2004 to 2008, further said the umpires have to follow and examine whether there is a run out, an obstruction on the field and whether the ball has been taken fairly.

However, Taufel defended the officiating umpires, saying the umpires have to consider a number of things while examining every ball. (Photo:AP/AFP) Sydney: A day after England lifted its maiden ICC Men's Cricket World Cup trophy, former Australian umpire Simon Taufel on Monday said that England should have got only five runs instead of six runs off the third ball of the last over against New Zealand. 

The replays showed that the England batsmen had not crossed at the time of the throw. The final will be remembered for ages as it did not have a winner after the 50-over and super over action, both of which were tied. New Zealand's Martin Guptill threw the ball in an attempt to run out Stokes but the ball bounced off Stokes' bat and reached the boundary. What's unfortunate is that people think that umpiring is just about outs and not outs. The act of the overthrow starts when the fielder releases the ball

Hide Comments | Add Comment