There are currently 10 responses to “IPL 18th Match - Rajasthan Royals v Kolkata Knight Riders - Awesome Catch by Smith but Not Out”

Why not let us know what you think by adding your own comment! Your opinion is as valid as anyone elses, so come on... let us know what you think.

1. 1 On November 30th, 1999, roopitbhu said:

   Ganguly is not a disciplined captain. He is harking back on his past. Shane has every right to say his frustration for Gang’s behaviour.

2. 2 On November 30th, 1999, Playtechy said:

   fadjaz;
   The big deal is - Ganguly practicly ‘appealed’ for a not-out decision.
   Why the hell does he need to ask if it was out - he could have waited to see if his finger goes up!
   Its obvious that Ganguly TOLD the umpire that it wasnt a clean catch. And the umpire folded. He should have asked Rudi before going to the 3rd umpire. But like most Indian umpires - when a decision involving India is to be made - when in doubt favour India.

3. 3 On November 30th, 1999, Playtechy said:

   gromell…
   LOOK AT HIS ACTIONS. HE IS NOT “ASKING” HE IS “TELLING”
   Why could he not WAIT for the decision? WHY DID HE HAVE TO GESTURE ANYTHING!?
   The Indian umpire should have asked Rudi FIRST before going to the 3rd umpire, Rudi said it was out - but the Indian cheat went to the 3rd umpire.
   Ganguly is a cheating prick - and thats why he is noted as THE WORST BEHAVED PLAYER IN WORLD CRICKET HISTORY; going by ICC FACTS.

4. 4 On November 30th, 1999, fadjaz said:

   whats so disgraceful about this?! i mean this has happened before, batsmen have went to the umpire to confirm that if it was a clean catch in the past. But on the other hand the decision from the third umpire was really stupid!

5. 5 On November 30th, 1999, ravishriju said:

   i think it was clean catch …

6. 6 On November 30th, 1999, mrkhan101 said:

   ganguly is an ass hole…

7. 7 On November 30th, 1999, charith05 said:

   this was a clean catch

8. 8 On November 30th, 1999, gromell said:

   ganguly did nothing. he asked the umpire if the catch was clean and he referred to the third umpire and he decided it’s inconclusive and gave ganguly the benefit of doubt. nothing wrong in it and from a a batsman point of view Ganguly did the right thing, nothing arrogant about it. it was umpire’s decision.

9. 9 On November 30th, 1999, gromell said:

   benefit of doubt for the batsman prevails. stupid commentators.

10. 10 On November 30th, 1999, dinu20 said:

    y dont ganguly get some sportsmanship instead of gaining more attitude??? he thinks he is eterenal and now one can beat him…. that sucks…. ppl like him are shame for any sport!!!

Leave a Reply