Cricket Betting Site Betway
Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 71

Thread: Oh Deary Me!

  1. #1
    State Vice-Captain Armadillo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Literate Essex- yes, it does exist!
    Posts
    1,092

    Oh Deary Me!

    The Eng vs Pak series that has just gone had some of the worst umpiring I have ever seen, especially in the last two tests. This atrocious showing was mainly down to messirs Koertzen and Hair. Now I know people say umpiring is a very hard job and all, but surely its not that hard! Geraint Jones middles the ball onto his pad, Koertzen gives him out, Collingwood edges the ball so it deviates and the keeper takes a diving catch, Hair has wax in his ears! If these guys want to be umpires they have to get these decisions right, after all its these decisions that can turn a match. In the morning session Pakistan must have had three or four plum lbw decisions turned down. Maybe umpires should be younger, meaning their hearing and sight isn't as slow as Daryll Hair's Just one other thing, how easy is it to see a red cricket ball in quite bad light with shades on, sort it out Rudi!
    Discuss....
    Member of LSU (bowl part time pies)

    RIP Fardin

  2. #2
    International Vice-Captain open365's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    liverpool
    Posts
    4,066
    Kaneria defintely should have had a hat trick and Jones shouldn't have been given out.

    i agree with the fact that you get the same amount of bad decisions as you get good ones and it doesn't effect much in the long run,but i'd still rather have better umpiring decisions.i don't know about the players,but if i were one,i would feel a lot better knowing that every decision has been given as fairly as possible so i couldn't complain about getting out.atm,the umpires just can't give as good a decision as technology can.

  3. #3
    International Regular Beleg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    3,450
    Easy there dude.

    Umpiring is a thankless job. While criticising the umpires about the decisions that go wrong, we tend to forget about decision that they DID get right. For example, just from this test match, I can remember a few appeals against Inzy and Akmal (LBW and caught behind) which at first sight looked pretty clear outs on the TV screen. The umpire ruled non out and the TV replay showed how correct he was.

    There is no doubt in my mind that the standard of umpriing has improved a great deal and is gradually on an up. I remember a few series from the 90's and the umpiring there was attrocious by today's standards, to say the least. You will never be able to get 100 percent accuracy, even with automatic equipment, there's always a margin for error; no mathematical model is ever perfect.

    If you want maximum (and sustained) accuracy than you have to get rid of the field umpires, it's as simple as that. To be honest, I am not sure I want that sort of accuracy though. There's a certain element of uncertainity that's an inherent part of the current cricketing set-up, I don't want my game to become boring and mechanical - a chore or a job rather than sport.

    If that means sacrificing some of the available technologies and perks, than so be it.

  4. #4
    State Vice-Captain Armadillo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Literate Essex- yes, it does exist!
    Posts
    1,092
    Quote Originally Posted by Beleg
    Easy there dude.

    Umpiring is a thankless job. While criticising the umpires about the decisions that go wrong, we tend to forget about decision that they DID get correct. For example, just from this test match, I can remember a few appeals against Inzy and Akmal (LBW and caught behind) which at first sight looked pretty clear outs on the TV screen. The umpire ruled non out and the TV replay showed how correct he was.
    Its all well and good giving not outs, some times you're gonna be right if you keep doing it. The only lbw's given were plumb which my grandma (who really doesn't know anything about cricket) would have spotted, apart from the Jones dismissal of course.....


  5. #5
    Hall of Fame Member steds's Avatar
    Breakout Champion!
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    ****ing cold and ****ing wet
    Posts
    17,205
    Guess what, guys. Umpires are human! They make mistakes. I personally think people using technology to scrutinise every single decision an umpire makes and jumping on top of them if the decision is proved wrong is just low. Remember, this technology which is so much greater than umpires is hardly perfect either.

  6. #6
    International Vice-Captain open365's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    liverpool
    Posts
    4,066
    I don't really take to the 'human' element about cricketing decisions.

    there was a post on cricinfo's technology blog that summed my views up perfectly.

    'the flaw is not the charm'

    Another typical argument is that the charm of cricket comes from the element of uncertainty, and that human error is a part of that charm. I disagree. Cricket gets its charm not from human error but from human excellence. When a quality spinner is continually frustrated by batsmen who keep padding up to him and getting the benefit of the inevitable doubt, a doubt that technology can reduce, if not remove, that excellence is compromised. When a batsman like Sachin Tendulkar is wrongly given out time and again on his tours to Australia, to ludicrous errors that the use of technology would eliminate, that excellence is compromised. Technology reduces error and does justice to the excellence that is the soul of the game. Cricket can only benefit from it.

  7. #7
    U19 Cricketer Hazza's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Greater London (UK)
    Posts
    411
    I think the Umpires had a bad series, and maybe it does call for techinology as, in my opinion, the main reason of having Umpires out there is to get the correct decision. If it means implementing technology to get the correct decisions then surely it would stop arguments like this happening in the first place.

    I know it may take a human element out of the game, but using proven technology would increase the standard of playing. If the umpiring decisions could be checked using the snickometer for example, then England may well have saved the game.

  8. #8
    International Vice-Captain open365's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    liverpool
    Posts
    4,066
    Quote Originally Posted by steds
    Guess what, guys. Umpires are human! They make mistakes. I personally think people using technology to scrutinise every single decision an umpire makes and jumping on top of them if the decision is proved wrong is just low. Remember, this technology which is so much greater than umpires is hardly perfect either.
    the perfect solution fallacy in action again.

    sure,technology can't give every decision a perfect answer but thats no argument not to use it.

    drink and drive campaigns don't stop every drink driver,so should we stop them?no.

    When umpires where the best avalible people to give a decision,then fine,i accept that they're human,but when we have so much power to give better decisions,i stuglle to comprehend why we aren't using them.

  9. #9
    International Regular Beleg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    3,450
    The only lbw's given were plumb which my grandma (who really doesn't know anything about cricket) would have spotted, apart from the Jones dismissal of course.....
    I am sure ICC would love to hire the services of your grandma, in that case.

    Remember, being an armchair umpiring expert is one thing, performing in the middle is a totally different matter altogether.

  10. #10
    Out of interest there's been senior tour tennis on BBC of late, caught a bit of Courier v McEnroe where Hawkeye was being used to judge line calls (whether ball landed in or out) on appeal from the players (in the normal tennis tour they're thinking of limiting the number of appeals to 2 per player per set) and it even shut McEnroe up when the Hawkeye generated replay came up. The first appeal the response was a bit slow and it took 20-30 seconds for the replay to come up (probably human error), but it was near instant after that.

    Whether the ICC and umpires like it or not, this is the future for cricket.
    World Scrabble Champion 2014. National Scrabble Champion 2009, 2015.
    Author of Word Addict
    Countdown Series 57 Champion
    King of the Arcade
    ECB - you are a complete ****ing disgrace, #FTECB

  11. #11
    International Vice-Captain open365's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    liverpool
    Posts
    4,066
    Quote Originally Posted by Beleg
    I am sure ICC would love to hire the services of your grandma, in that case.

    Remember, being an armchair umpiring expert is one thing, performing in the middle is a totally different matter altogether.
    reminds me of the Cairns/Lee convo.

    Cairn-'my mum could captain Australia' in response to people praising Ricky Ponting's captaincy.

    Lee-'i'm sure Chris Cairn's mum is a very good cricketer'

  12. #12
    U19 Cricketer Hazza's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Greater London (UK)
    Posts
    411
    Quote Originally Posted by Scaly piscine
    Whether the ICC and umpires like it or not, this is the future for cricket.
    Yes, umpiring of this level cannot be tolerated for too much longer.

  13. #13
    International Vice-Captain open365's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    liverpool
    Posts
    4,066
    so lets look at the pros and cons of technology

    pros
    more decisions are correct
    players can't complain/feel hard done by
    armchair fans can finaly stop shouting at the TV

    cons
    Appealing will become less frenetic
    Billy Bowden will turn from 20% umpire to 90% showpony
    the 4th umpire might acctualy have to watch the game for a change

  14. #14
    State Vice-Captain Armadillo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Literate Essex- yes, it does exist!
    Posts
    1,092
    I'm not calling for out and out technology, what I'm saying is, if these umpires want to be professional umpires they have to get simple decisions right. Daryll Hair is renowned for getting decisions wrong but it doesn't stop him. Does he get told after the game that he got these decisions wrong?. Did you see Geraint Jones' reaction after his decision? there's no telling me that that adds to the spirit of the game. Note: I was referring to my grandma knowing the plum ones were out, just added to the point lol.

  15. #15
    U19 Cricketer Hazza's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Greater London (UK)
    Posts
    411
    Quote Originally Posted by open365
    so lets look at the pros and cons of technology...
    cons
    the 4th umpire might acctualy have to watch the game for a change
    Is that really a con?

Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast


Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Current best player
    By 12th Man in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 84
    Last Post: 12-01-2005, 09:50 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •