01-08-2026, 04:09 AM
(This post was last modified: 01-08-2026, 04:10 AM by Baggiedownunder.)
(01-08-2026, 12:57 AM)rsbaggy2 Wrote: Snicko not fit for purpose.
That is not in doubt.
But even so all you can ask for is consistency when referrals are made. Snicko showed a spike just after passing Weatherald's bat. Following on from Stokes dismissal in a previous test in similar circumstances surely the same logic should have applied here?
The fact it wasn't given out is a disgrace.
It didn’t spike it shown a thickening however agree it isn’t fit for purpose.
It was the reason for a 4-1 defeat

