gonna kill spark
gonna kill spark
"He uses statistics as a drunken man uses lamp-posts.. . For support rather than illumination. " - Andrew Lang (1844-1912)
Should have zing bats, so when the ball hits the bat it lights up.
Parmi | #1 draft pick | Jake King is **** | Big Bash League tipping champion of the universeCome and Paint Turtle
Should have a 20 run penalty for every ******** LBW review where the batsman hasn't clearly hit it. That'll clear it right up imo.
Exit pursuing a beer
National Scrabble Champion 2009, 8th, 11th and 5th in 2009/2011/2013 World Championships, gold medal (team) at Causeway, 2011 Masters Champion
Australia’s Darren Lehmann is a ‘blatant loser’ insists Stuart Broad
Countdown Series 57 Champion
King of the Arcade
Reply from mods to my prank bans in public:
Reply from mods to my prank bans in private:
MSN - evil_budgie @ hotmail.co.uk
Surely last night's game makes it blatantly obvious it should be in the hands of the third umpire, and not the players....
Surely this has been explained 9000 times, that's not ****ing practical.
That's because it was obviously not out. The problems come when you get more and more marginal ones so where does the third ump draw the line on what he overturns and what he doesn't? Aus had one review, they blew it, so hard luck on Warner but his captain was a dick.
If you use it for a marginal LBW decision then you can't complain about having no reviews left.
If you only used it for when you know you got bat on it when given LBW, when you know you didn't get bat on it when given out caught, then you should be able to overturn all the mistakes in your innings.
The reason it's in the player's hands is because they've got no-one else to complain to if they **** it up. Imagine how much **** third umpires will get if it gets put in their hands. what if a spinner is bowling off three steps and he's already bowled another ball before the third ump has time to get his word out to the middle? The system is fine, teams just need to get their bloody **** together about using it right.
Surely there could be some system brought in that allows players to challenge an obviously wrong decision and have it reversed? Obviously this would need to be regulated to stop spurious referrals and thus teams should perhaps be limited to just one challenge so the system isn't used unless a player is absolutely sure the decision is wrong. Teams would need to be careful not to waste their referral on a dismissal that, while close, is not a howler.
Oh wait, that's what we have. Blame lies squarely with Clarke here.
LBW should be entirely at the discretion of the on field umpire unless there has been a clear bat on ball, which can be decided quickly by the 3rd umpire based on the live footage (plus hot spot if it's clear). I still think hot spot can be inconclusive for fine edges to the keeper, and the standing umpire is still the best person to make those decisions. Run outs/stumpings are where technology is most useful.
One review is fine as long as batsmen stop wasting them on "but I don't want to be out" reviews.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)