Cricket Player Manager

View Poll Results: UDRS?

Voters
135. You may not vote on this poll
  • In favour

    112 82.96%
  • Opposed

    13 9.63%
  • BCCI is the best organisation out

    10 7.41%
Page 112 of 125 FirstFirst ... 1262102110111112113114122 ... LastLast
Results 1,666 to 1,680 of 1874
Like Tree8Likes

Thread: ***Official*** DRS discussion thread

  1. #1666
    International Coach uvelocity's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    seamy road
    Posts
    12,016
    Quote Originally Posted by BackFootPunch View Post
    Oh wait, that's what we have. Blame lies squarely with Clarke here.
    you're right, but be that as it may, the system, by allowing a player to be involved and causing it to not catch what it was intended to, is failing.
    Quote Originally Posted by sledger View Post
    I just love all kinds of balls.

  2. #1667
    State Vice-Captain BackFootPunch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    1,121
    Quote Originally Posted by uvelocity View Post
    you're right, but be that as it may, the system, by allowing a player to be involved and causing it to not catch what it was intended to, is failing.
    But does that mean we need to fix the system or the people (ab)using it? There are examples in all areas of culture and society of theoretically fine systems being used badly by people. Generally we just accept that people are dumb and don't blame the system, why not do the same here?

  3. #1668
    International Coach morgieb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Dishing out broken ****ing floggings
    Posts
    11,379
    If a system is in place to fix howlers, then why can't some howlers not be reviewed?

    Problem is, there's no real perfect system to fix this.
    5-0

    RIP Craig Walsh (Craig) 1985-2012

    Proudly supporting the #2 cricketer of all time.

  4. #1669
    International Coach morgieb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Dishing out broken ****ing floggings
    Posts
    11,379
    And what happens if someone reviews a decision, but it's umpire's call? That's unfair if you refer it as a fielder it's given not out, yet as a batsmen it's given out. Either the rules of benefit of the doubt needs to be changed, or they should not lose referrals.

    tbf, this didn't happen with Clarke, but still...


  5. #1670
    Cricket Web Staff Member / Global Moderator Neil Pickup's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Oxford, England
    Posts
    26,858
    Quote Originally Posted by GingerFurball View Post
    One review is fine as long as batsmen stop wasting them on "but I don't want to be out" reviews.
    This x1000
    MSN Messenger: minardineil2000 at hotmail dot com | AAAS Chairman
    CricketWeb Black | CricketWeb XI Captain
    ClarkeWatch: We're Watching Rikki - Are You?

    Up The Grecians - Exeter City FC

    Completing the Square: My Cricket Web Blog

  6. #1671
    Cricket Web Staff Member / Global Moderator Neil Pickup's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Oxford, England
    Posts
    26,858
    Quote Originally Posted by morgieb View Post
    And what happens if someone reviews a decision, but it's umpire's call? That's unfair if you refer it as a fielder it's given not out, yet as a batsmen it's given out. Either the rules of benefit of the doubt needs to be changed, or they should not lose referrals.

    tbf, this didn't happen with Clarke, but still...
    Then it's not a howler and you can suck it up.

  7. #1672
    International Coach morgieb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Dishing out broken ****ing floggings
    Posts
    11,379
    Quote Originally Posted by wellAlbidarned View Post
    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.
    Well if one can be overturned with a replay then it should be. If more advanced technology needs to be used, then let the decision stand. That's not particularly grey afaic.

  8. #1673
    International Coach morgieb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Dishing out broken ****ing floggings
    Posts
    11,379
    Quote Originally Posted by Neil Pickup View Post
    Then it's not a howler and you can suck it up.
    Then why should howlers have to suck it up?

    It's like circular logic here.

  9. #1674
    Cricketer Of The Year Cabinet96's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    London, England
    Posts
    9,946
    Quote Originally Posted by Neil Pickup View Post
    Then it's not a howler and you can suck it up.
    But it's also not really a "but I don't want to be out" review. I'm in favour of trying to get people to cut down on stupid reviews, but you put it at the risk of getting batsman not to review obviously wrong decisions due to fear of wasting the review, and that's a complete failure of the system.

    Many bowlers, and perhaps even a few batsmen, would argue that when reviewing something that is umpires call, they were actually correct with their review. I somewhat agree, and think they probably shouldn't lose a review for it.
    Quote Originally Posted by Flem274* View Post
    This English top three are cornflakes. They're not the most exciting thing out but they're pretty effective. Then the middle order are the sugar. Would be too much on their own but added to the cornflakes they add some much needed interest

    When KP returns he will be the banana..

  10. #1675
    International Captain wellAlbidarned's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    away from the palms
    Posts
    6,510
    Quote Originally Posted by morgieb View Post
    And what happens if someone reviews a decision, but it's umpire's call? That's unfair if you refer it as a fielder it's given not out, yet as a batsmen it's given out. Either the rules of benefit of the doubt needs to be changed, or they should not lose referrals.

    tbf, this didn't happen with Clarke, but still...
    Then the umpire didn't get it wrong.

    Quote Originally Posted by morgieb View Post
    Well if one can be overturned with a replay then it should be. If more advanced technology needs to be used, then let the decision stand. That's not particularly grey afaic.
    Oh trust me, there'll be oceans of grey discovered. You can't have a third party completely in charge of something like this, it'll be an utter mess.

    Quote Originally Posted by morgieb View Post
    Then why should howlers have to suck it up?

    It's like circular logic here.
    Not sure what you're getting at here.
    Exit pursuing a beer

  11. #1676
    International Coach morgieb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Dishing out broken ****ing floggings
    Posts
    11,379
    Quote Originally Posted by wellAlbidarned View Post
    Then the umpire didn't get it wrong.



    Oh trust me, there'll be oceans of grey discovered. You can't have a third party completely in charge of something like this, it'll be an utter mess.



    Not sure what you're getting at here.
    He didn't get it right though. That's the grey area that everyone talks about.

    The point is that if howlers can't be referred, then why should people suck up their team getting wrong referrals?

  12. #1677
    International Captain wellAlbidarned's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    away from the palms
    Posts
    6,510
    Well you can't prove he got it wrong, so the decision stays with him because he's in charge. Might as well get rid of umpires if that's not going to be the case. Since we have this annoying and controversial grey area we want to avoid it where possible and the best way of achieving that is by discouraging players from reviewing 50/50 calls. The grey area is the umpire's domain.

    Still don't get what you mean with that second line. They can refer howlers all day as long as some dick in their top order doesn't pack a sad.

  13. #1678
    International Coach morgieb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Dishing out broken ****ing floggings
    Posts
    11,379
    Well tbf, even if you don't review the 50/50 stuff, the way it works means that you may choose not to review a decision, because you haven't got enough reviews left, and even if technology would've overturned it, you have vague doubts that it would, particularly early in the innings. And that just sucks.

    An example in a different sport which uses referrals was last night in the tennis, where Wawrinka didn't want to overturn a decision as he was weary about how much of a howler it was, yet his original conviction was correct - it was in. And that has 3 referrals a set - much more than 1-2 referrals a game. It could well have cost him the match.

    Having only 1 review means that some things that would've been overturned may go unreferred, even if some **** didn't waste it on themselves, and that is ineffective use of UDRS, I feel.

  14. #1679
    School Boy/Girl Captain
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    198
    Quote Originally Posted by morgieb View Post
    Well tbf, even if you don't review the 50/50 stuff, the way it works means that you may choose not to review a decision, because you haven't got enough reviews left, and even if technology would've overturned it, you have vague doubts that it would, particularly early in the innings. And that just sucks.

    An example in a different sport which uses referrals was last night in the tennis, where Wawrinka didn't want to overturn a decision as he was weary about how much of a howler it was, yet his original conviction was correct - it was in. And that has 3 referrals a set - much more than 1-2 referrals a game. It could well have cost him the match.

    Having only 1 review means that some things that would've been overturned may go unreferred, even if some **** didn't waste it on themselves, and that is ineffective use of UDRS, I feel.
    Really comes down to what you want from the system, if it's to eliminate howlers then the system is fine as is, don't blame the system if players abuse it by referring 50/50 calls which go against them leaving no reviews for when genuine howlers occur...

    If it's to get as many right decisions as possible then you throw the decision to refer to the umpires, only problem is then that every appeal will end up being reviewed (as with run outs and stumpings now).

    Couldn't really blame the umpires for that either, would YOU want to be the umpire who got a decision wrong because you decided not to review it?

  15. #1680
    Hall of Fame Member Marcuss's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Above you
    Posts
    15,682
    Quote Originally Posted by morgieb View Post
    Then why should howlers have to suck it up?

    It's like circular logic here.
    Because if you waste your referrals on non-howlers you don't deserve to use them for their correct purpose.



Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

Similar Threads

  1. CricSim/PlanetCricket Discussion etc
    By ripper868 in forum Testing Forum
    Replies: 80
    Last Post: 17-08-2010, 07:15 PM
  2. Sri Lanka Thread
    By chaminda_00 in forum 2009 ICC World Twenty20
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 05-05-2009, 06:29 AM
  3. Trade Discussion Thread
    By Simon in forum World Club Cricket
    Replies: 137
    Last Post: 15-04-2009, 04:15 PM

Posting Permissions

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