***Official*** DRS discussion thread - Page 2

Prince EWS · 06-12-2010, 04:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dissector

Clearly not much of a debate here and like most I would like to see it in every series. UDRS could be improved but it's better than what came before. Opponents of UDRS seem to basically be arguing that a 95% system is better than a 99% system because the latter isn't 100%.

Bullet!!!!.

social · 06-12-2010, 05:16 AM

Given that the technology is not infallible (e.g. seems the margin of error on ball hitting stumps is half a ball width, snicko cant be used for whatever reason etc) and we've also seen the 3rd umpire making mistakes in spit of its presence, I'm against its wholesale adoption

Leave it for very basic stuff like no-balls, runouts/stumpings, point of contact with pitch/pad etc and the rest up to the umpire

I've actually come to miss the human element in decision making and feel the wholesale adoption of technology has taken something away from the current Ashes test series

andyc · 06-12-2010, 06:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dissector

Clearly not much of a debate here and like most I would like to see it in every series. UDRS could be improved but it's better than what came before. Opponents of UDRS seem to basically be arguing that a 95% system is better than a 99% system because the latter isn't 100%.

Sums up my views pretty much perfectly.

Shri · 06-12-2010, 06:49 AM

Not a fan of the limited number of referals. Make 'em unlimited or at least increase the number and would support it. Also if the hawk eye says it is hitting the stumps, it should be given out regardless of the margin.

marc71178 · 06-12-2010, 06:57 AM

But hawk eye isn't accurate enough to say that, which is why there margin of error has to be there.

GingerFurball · 06-12-2010, 07:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shri

Not a fan of the limited number of referals. Make 'em unlimited or at least increase the number and would support it. Also if the hawk eye says it is hitting the stumps, it should be given out regardless of the margin.

The number of referrals is unlimited though: as long as you're using your referrals to overturn wrong decisions (see Cook's dismissal and the 2 referrals used in Australia's 2nd innings in this Test) then you won't run out.

smalishah84 · 06-12-2010, 07:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by zinzan12

Needs a bit of re-jigging, but effectively we're getting closer to eliminating the shockers, which is the main thing for mine.

This.

Marcuss · 06-12-2010, 08:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by marc71178

But hawk eye isn't accurate enough to say that, which is why there margin of error has to be there.

Tbf, Hawkeye is consistent. So whilst marginal calls might have been missing the stumps, they also might have been hitting. So as long as the margin for error on the cameras is the same around the world, I'd have no issue with all balls Hawkeye says to be clipping the stumps being given out.
Benefit of the doubt goes to the batsman enough as it is.

weldone · 06-12-2010, 08:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marcuss

Tbf, Hawkeye is consistent. So whilst marginal calls might have been missing the stumps, they also might have been hitting. So as long as the margin for error on the cameras is the same around the world, I'd have no issue with all balls Hawkeye says to be clipping the stumps being given out.
Benefit of the doubt goes to the batsman enough as it is.

Nah, I am a firm believer in the theory that benefit of the doubt has to be with the batsman.

zaremba · 06-12-2010, 08:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dissector

Clearly not much of a debate here and like most I would like to see it in every series. UDRS could be improved but it's better than what came before. Opponents of UDRS seem to basically be arguing that a 95% system is better than a 99% system because the latter isn't 100%.

Spot on.

weed wizard · 06-12-2010, 10:30 AM

I would blindly say , yes.
Adding HOTSPOT, HAWKEYE, SNICKOMETRE together wil b good for cricket.

As far as BCCI is concerned, they sure are the dumbest board in the city.

smalishah84 · 06-12-2010, 11:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by weed wizard

.

As far as BCCI is concerned, they sure are the dumbest board in the city.

The PCB begs to differ

weed wizard · 06-12-2010, 11:32 AM

Couldnt agree more, mate.
But BCCI is even dumber

Blaze 18 · 06-12-2010, 11:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GingerFurball

The number of referrals is unlimited though: as long as you're using your referrals to overturn wrong decisions (see Cook's dismissal and the 2 referrals used in Australia's 2nd innings in this Test) then you won't run out.

This. Having unlimited unsuccessful reviews is a bad idea, as teams would just feel inclined to go upstairs for every thing.

BoyBrumby · 06-12-2010, 01:41 PM

Unashamedly a fan. Was initially anti as I thought the partial way it would be applied by captains could be an issue (and I wasn't entirely wrong), but it's so much better than not having it.

Still needs tweaking, but if it overturns just one duff call it's justified its worth IMHO.

View Poll Results: UDRS?
In favour	109	84.50%
Opposed	10	7.75%
BCCI is the best organisation out	10	7.75%
Voters: 129. You may not vote on this poll

06-12-2010, 06:49 AM	#19 (permalink)
Shri Cricketer Of The Year Join Date: Jan 2007 Posts: 8,937	Not a fan of the limited number of referals. Make 'em unlimited or at least increase the number and would support it. Also if the hawk eye says it is hitting the stumps, it should be given out regardless of the margin. __________________ RIP Craigos. Owe you a beer.:( http://www.cricketweb.net/forum/2186298-post7381.html 4-0; 5-0; 4-0; 3-0; 4-0 Banter is a two way street. Deal with it.

06-12-2010, 06:57 AM	#20 (permalink)
marc71178 Eyes not spreadsheets Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: England Posts: 56,334	But hawk eye isn't accurate enough to say that, which is why there margin of error has to be there. __________________ 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.

06-12-2010, 10:30 AM	#26 (permalink)
weed wizard School Boy/Girl Cricketer Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: city of townville Posts: 85	I would blindly say , yes. Adding HOTSPOT, HAWKEYE, SNICKOMETRE together wil b good for cricket. As far as BCCI is concerned, they sure are the dumbest board in the city. __________________ President George W. Bush was once a cheerleader!

06-12-2010, 01:41 PM	#30 (permalink)
BoyBrumby Englishman Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: Doing the stance Posts: 42,613	Unashamedly a fan. Was initially anti as I thought the partial way it would be applied by captains could be an issue (and I wasn't entirely wrong), but it's so much better than not having it. Still needs tweaking, but if it overturns just one duff call it's justified its worth IMHO. __________________ *- As featured in The Independent.* "This is not the time for namby-pamby promising youngsters who might just do something; not the time for building for the future. Pragmatism rules and they don't come more pragmatic than Rogers." - Victor Marks makes the case for stiff-legged and stiff-armed 35 year old left-handers in Ashes squads

06-12-2010, 05:16 AM	#17 (permalink)
social International Coach Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: AUSTRALIA Posts: 11,053	Given that the technology is not infallible (e.g. seems the margin of error on ball hitting stumps is half a ball width, snicko cant be used for whatever reason etc) and we've also seen the 3rd umpire making mistakes in spit of its presence, I'm against its wholesale adoption Leave it for very basic stuff like no-balls, runouts/stumpings, point of contact with pitch/pad etc and the rest up to the umpire I've actually come to miss the human element in decision making and feel the wholesale adoption of technology has taken something away from the current Ashes test series

06-12-2010, 11:32 AM	#28 (permalink)
weed wizard School Boy/Girl Cricketer Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: city of townville Posts: 85	Couldnt agree more, mate. But BCCI is even dumber

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
CricSim/PlanetCricket Discussion etc	ripper868	Testing Forum	80	17-08-2010 06:15 PM
Sri Lanka Thread	chaminda_00	2009 ICC World Twenty20	7	05-05-2009 05:29 AM
Trade Discussion Thread	Simon	World Club Cricket	137	15-04-2009 03:15 PM