"Your averages, captain, coaches and players can probably survive incompetence over a relatively short series, so if youíre going to be rubbish, make sure itís against Pakistan, Sri Lanka, New Zealand or someone."
yyyeah it was an attempted joke.
I don't know much about the VirtualEye version, but I suspect that it's to do with how many cameras they have or where they are, thus reducing the input information and making VE inaccurate past a certain point. If Hawkeye are confident that their system lacks this problem, then they must have more input information.
Besides, the article that originally brought up this point mentioned that Hawkeye didn't even have a camera lined up behind the stumps. I can't see why cricinfo would lie or be mistaken about that.
tony greig saying on ten cricket that virtual eye actually has better cameras to show everything except predictive path.Arun lal agreeing with my view.
Was talking mostly sense.Actually agreed with you too on the batsman getting benefit doubt ,except on accuracy
The ICC has said it would ask 'experts' to examine the accuracy of predictive technology; hopefully those experts would be people who actually know something about all this stuff. So why not just wait for the results of the study by independent experts?
With Hot Spot being made mandatory, cue members of the BCCI to complain vigorously when the inevitable 'obvious nick which didn't leave a heat signature' appeal pops up and the guy tons up followed by "We never liked URDS in the first place, felt pressured to accept it, IT COSTS $60k PER MINUTE!!!", etc..
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)