Page 1 of 6 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 90

Thread: Improvements that need to be made in cricket

  1. #1
    U19 Debutant
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    303

    Improvements that need to be made in cricket

    Let's face it, there are a number of things currently wrong with our game atm and that have been allowed to continue for so long. These issues need to be addressed. Here are a few that I strong feel need attention.

    1. As soon as a team wins a match/when a boundary is hit/when two players are squaring up to each other, instead of showing the players (who the whole broadcast is meant to be about) they show the crowd or cheerleaders if t20 match.

    2. UDRS- Take it out of the players hands and let there be three independent 3rd umpires who can contact the on field umpires and notify them of obvious howlers, remove hawk eye as it is predictive. If 2/3 umpires, (who are in seperate rooms spot the same obvious mistake, then it can overturn an onfield decision) It is worth it as cricket is such a big sport now, that each game deserves to have 5 active match officials.

    3. 3rd umpires from the home country. What is the point of neutral on field umpires if 3rd umpire may have bias?

    4. Slow over rates. This is a con for all spectators, especially those who pay admission fee for 90 overs in day of test cricket and only get to see 78. Heavier sanctions need to be introduced.

    5. 7 game odi series. WTF. ICC should rule that no more than 5 in a series be permitted to preserve the format.

    6. Window for IPL. Commercialised franchise cricket is the best way to spread cricket around the world and the IPL needs to have all the top players competing for the entire tournament.

    7. When they show the highlights of a players innings in the middle of a match they show it from the crappiest camera angle that you can't even appreciate any of the shots.
    All Time Test XI:

    Openers: S.Gavaskar V.Sehwag Middle Order: V.Richards S.Tendulkar B.Lara All Rounders: G.Sobers I Khan (C) WK: A.Gilchrist Bowlers: W.Akram M.Marshall M.Muralitharan

    All Time ODI XI:

    WK: A.Gilchrist S.Tendulkar V.Richards R. Ponting M. Dhoni M. Bevan Allrounder: K.Dev Bowlers: W.Akram J. Garner M.Muralitharan G. McGrath

  2. #2
    International Coach KiWiNiNjA's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    In the kitchen
    Posts
    10,612
    Quote Originally Posted by dhillon28 View Post
    remove hawk eye as it is predictive.
    Whereas the human eye is much more accurate.......

  3. #3
    State Captain Lostman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    NY
    Posts
    1,946
    Did not know have of these were issues tbh.
    For as long as there is limited overs cricket - of ten, twenty or fifty overs - there will remain the Sri Lankan spinners' mid-innings choke

  4. #4
    Global Moderator Prince EWS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Cribbertopia
    Posts
    46,489
    The only way to remove the predictive element of lbw decisions is to change the lbw law. HawkEye is far more accurate than Cevno watching on TV.

    I also lol'd pretty hard at #1. If that's the #1 issue in our game, we're going fantastically...
    Rejecting 'analysis by checklist' and 'skill absolutism' since Dec '09
    Rejecting 'selection deontology' since Mar '15



  5. #5
    U19 Debutant
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    303
    Quote Originally Posted by KiWiNiNjA View Post
    Whereas the human eye is much more accurate.......
    lol....this is coming from someone who doesnt even know how the techonology works.....for all you know, hawkeye could be a pile of crap just randomnly blurting out predictions.

    in certain instances the human eye has been proved to be more accurate than hawk eye. hawk eye isnt even reliable at predicting where a ball even pitches, let alone deciding how much its gonna turn (how does it assess revolutions on the ball, amount of friction in the rough etc) and how much its gonna bounce (how does it assess bounce of the wicket esp when alot of wickets these days have uneven bounce)

    hey but the good thing is that kiwininja is gonna explain all these answers to everyone thsi forum because he very clever. Clever enough at least to make sarcastic comments on hawk eye since he has thoroughly tested the techonology.

    Reason why hawk eye shouldnt be used.........because i wouldnt like to be hung on that evidence.

  6. #6
    U19 Debutant
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    303
    Quote Originally Posted by Lostman View Post
    Did not know have of these were issues tbh.
    Did not know that you spell half like have.

  7. #7
    U19 Debutant
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    303
    Quote Originally Posted by Prince EWS View Post
    The only way to remove the predictive element of lbw decisions is to change the lbw law. HawkEye is far more accurate than Cevno watching on TV.

    I also lol'd pretty hard at #1. If that's the #1 issue in our game, we're going fantastically...
    I never said they were ranked in order. Secondly if you dont think viewing the interactions betwenn cricket players at crucial points of the match is more important than watching the crowd, then I dont know how you can call yourself a cricket fan. I wouldnt say hawk eye is necessarily more accurate than the human eye. How can you guarantee the accuracy of something you dont understand? There have been many instances when hawk has made howlers.
    Last edited by dhillon28; 08-02-2011 at 04:18 PM.

  8. #8
    Eyes not spreadsheets marc71178's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    England
    Posts
    58,432
    Quote Originally Posted by dhillon28 View Post
    hawk eye isnt even reliable at predicting where a ball even pitches,
    You what?!
    marc71178 - President and founding member of AAAS - we don't only appreciate when he does well, but also when he's not quite so good!

    Anyone want to join the Society?

    Beware the evils of Kit-Kats - they're immoral apparently.

  9. #9
    Request Your Custom Title Now! benchmark00's Avatar
    Tournaments Won: 1
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Is this CricketWeb's greatest poster in the short history of the forum?
    Posts
    37,157
    8. Ban Prince EWS from commenting on the sport
    Parmi | #1 draft pick | Jake King is **** | Big Bash League tipping champion of the universe
    Come and Paint Turtle
    Quote Originally Posted by Jono View Post
    Kohli. Do something in test cricket for once please.

    Thanks.

  10. #10
    Global Moderator Spark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    A Blood Rainbow
    Posts
    36,964
    Am I meant to take this seriously?
    Quote Originally Posted by Peter Moores
    We thought 275 was chaseable. We'll have to look at the data.
    forever 63*

  11. #11
    International Regular
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    3,374
    Quote Originally Posted by dhillon28 View Post
    lol....this is coming from someone who doesnt even know how the techonology works.....for all you know, hawkeye could be a pile of crap just randomnly blurting out predictions.
    If it was random, you would know it. Hawk-eye has almost* always been accurate.

    *Although once in NZ it didn't function probably and gave something completely ridiculous. But that just happened once and was very obvious.

    Quote Originally Posted by dhillon28 View Post
    in certain instances the human eye has been proved to be more accurate than hawk eye. hawk eye isnt even reliable at predicting where a ball even pitches, let alone deciding how much its gonna turn (how does it assess revolutions on the ball, amount of friction in the rough etc) and how much its gonna bounce (how does it assess bounce of the wicket esp when alot of wickets these days have uneven bounce)
    If the ball has already pitched, hawk-eye continues the path after it hits the pad. This takes into account everything, including: Amount of Spin, Amount of Swing, Bounce etc etc

    The only thing it can not predict is newly developing swing AFTER contact, but neither can the human eye can it? Since it has never happened.
    Last edited by TumTum; 08-02-2011 at 06:32 PM.

  12. #12
    Global Moderator Spark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    A Blood Rainbow
    Posts
    36,964
    The only thing it can not predict is newly developing swing AFTER contact, but neither can the human eye can it? Since it has never happened.
    Well, it might, but the laws of cricket dictate that it shouldn't.

  13. #13
    International Coach Shri's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    11,934
    Plz give suggestions.

  14. #14
    International Regular
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    3,374
    Quote Originally Posted by dhillon28 View Post
    7. When they show the highlights of a players innings in the middle of a match they show it from the crappiest camera angle that you can't even appreciate any of the shots.

  15. #15
    Global Moderator Spark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    A Blood Rainbow
    Posts
    36,964
    Quote Originally Posted by Shri View Post
    Plz give suggestions.
    Plz give a serious reply

Page 1 of 6 123 ... LastLast


Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

Similar Threads

  1. Biggest plodders in international cricket history.
    By Camel56 in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 175
    Last Post: 26-07-2010, 02:34 PM
  2. CW Players A-Z
    By Mr Mxyzptlk in forum CW Development League
    Replies: 316
    Last Post: 09-05-2007, 11:35 PM
  3. Surrey 2002: A Cricket Captain Diary
    By SIX AND OUT in forum General
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 17-02-2005, 08:25 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
  •