Standard ODI Playing Conditions - Sri Lanka Cricket

standard ONE-day INTERNatiONAL
match playing conditions 04
3.3 The process of consultation
a) on receipt of an eligible and timely request for a Player Review, the
on-field umpire will make the sign of 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’), under Clause 24.3 (‘bowler
breaking wicket in delivering ball’) and under Clause 42.4.2(a) (‘full toss
passing above waist height’), where appropriate advising the on-field
umpire accordingly. See also paragraph 3.10 below.
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 should report that the replays are
‘inconclusive’. The third umpire should not give answers conveying
likelihoods or probabilities.
i) Subject to paragraph 3.3 (j) below, specifically when advising on LBW
decisions, the requirement for a high degree of confidence should be
interpreted as follows:
i) 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.
ii) 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 in line within an area demarcated by a line
drawn down the middle of the outer stumps.
- 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.
4.39