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 91 of 125 FirstFirst ... 41818990919293101 ... LastLast
Results 1,351 to 1,365 of 1874
Like Tree8Likes

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

  1. #1351
    Hall of Fame Member honestbharani's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Chennai
    Posts
    15,695
    Quote Originally Posted by wellAlbidarned View Post
    How can you rightly assume Hawk-eye got the predictive path wrong every time it looks a touch dodgy? Human perception and prediction isn't flawless too you know. As you keep saying, it's about predicting what never happened.

    Yeah, the 18 metres statement was an exaggeration, but it still stands that the software will almost always be reasonably accurate based on the the information it DOES know for sure, much more so than a human umpire at any rate. With a shorter length ball, there's more information than can be gathered on the ball's flight path after bouncing. With a fuller ball, there's less indication of the ball's future path, but much less time for any sideways deviation to occur, so the various factors cancel out.

    Also, what's with this "making the umpires look bad" argument? If an umpire gets it wrong, I'm sure he can live with that, life goes on. If an umpire gets a lot of calls wrong, then he's obviously a **** umpire, which will unfortunately tend to make him look like a moron.
    I don't. I am talking based on the tests they have done and samples like that Warne ball to Strauss in the 2005 Ashes. Of course, hawkeye has apparently improved and become more accurate, but I guess it isn't 100% and perhaps will never be, even when projecting for balls that did go through upto the stumps and/or keeper.
    We miss you, Fardin. :(. RIP.
    Quote Originally Posted by vic_orthdox View Post
    In the end, I think it's so utterly, incomprehensibly boring. There is so much context behind each innings of cricket that dissecting statistics into these small samples is just worthless. No-one has ever been faced with the same situation in which they come out to bat as someone else. Ever.
    A cricket supporter forever

    Member of CW Red and AAAS - Appreciating only the best.


    Check out this awesome e-fed:

    PWE Efed

  2. #1352
    Global Moderator Prince EWS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Moving to Somalia
    Posts
    43,533
    Quote Originally Posted by honestbharani View Post
    Nope.. Coz the ones who have posted have tended to complain about decisions when those replays are shown. And look, it is not wrong of them either. That is human nature. I am just saying that NOT showing those replays has helped get some perception for what the umpire is going through.
    Fair enough then. DRS isn't about chastising and blaming umpires though. My entire point is that they're human and the nature of cricket - particularly the lbw law - opens itself up to heaps of human error in decision-making that we could really do without. We don't need HawkEye because umpiring standards are poor; we need it because umpiring is ****ing hard.
    ~ Cribbage ~

    Rejecting 'analysis by checklist' and 'skill absolutism' since December 2009

  3. #1353
    Hall of Fame Member honestbharani's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Chennai
    Posts
    15,695
    Quote Originally Posted by Prince EWS View Post
    Well that's exactly the point. The predictive path is needed because we can't tell without it.
    no.. the predictive path of the hawkeye is not always accurate and need not be, either. We are just ASSUMING that it will show the correct path. And if you need the predictive path to know whether the decision was right/wrong, it is obvious it isn't a howler which, they say, DRS is there to eliminate. Look, LBWs are subjective and they always will be. The more technology aids you have, the more complicated it gets. I am all for using the hawkeye to see where it pitched, where it hit the pad etc. But I am becoming less and less sold to the idea of using the predictive or projected path of the ball every day.

  4. #1354
    Hall of Fame Member Furball's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Anyone But England
    Posts
    19,999
    Quote Originally Posted by honestbharani View Post
    Nope.. Coz the ones who have posted have tended to complain about decisions when those replays are shown. And look, it is not wrong of them either. That is human nature. I am just saying that NOT showing those replays has helped get some perception for what the umpire is going through.
    Nah, I can't agree with your opinion at all.

    Sky and Channel 4 have been showing HawkEye graphics for years because the viewers wanted to see them. The difference now is that people get more frustrated when HawkEye shows that an umpire has made a mistake, because there's a system in place to correct such obvious errors that is being obstructed by a single board who are being stupid for some unknown reason.

    Pretty much no-one has complained about the decision Watson got in the last test in the 2nd innings because the option was there for Watson to refer it and he didn't take. When Aleem Dar wrongly reprived Michael Hussey at Brisbane in the 1st Ashes Test, the frustration lay with Strauss for wasting our two previous reviews.


  5. #1355
    Hall of Fame Member honestbharani's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Chennai
    Posts
    15,695
    Quote Originally Posted by Prince EWS View Post
    Fair enough then. DRS isn't about chastising and blaming umpires though. My entire point is that they're human and the nature of cricket - particularly the lbw law - opens itself up to heaps of human error in decision-making that we could really do without. We don't need HawkEye because umpiring standards are poor; we need it because umpiring is ****ing hard.
    see my post above. Obviously, I want some form of DRS but as I have been saying, I am becoming less and less convinced about using the predictive path technology.


    What I was trying to point out, from my initial post, was that in series where there is no DRS, it makes sense to NOT show the predictive path and hotspot replays. I guess I have done a real lousy job of getting that point across, but that was the point all along.

  6. #1356
    Global Moderator Prince EWS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Moving to Somalia
    Posts
    43,533
    Quote Originally Posted by GingerFurball View Post
    Pretty much no-one has complained about the decision Watson got in the last test in the 2nd innings because the option was there for Watson to refer it and he didn't take.
    See, I still think that's dire. Players shouldn't have to be umpires IMO, and the fact that Watson chose not to refer his lbw doesn't make the decision any less of a blight on the game. But that's a separate debate altogether.

  7. #1357
    Hall of Fame Member Furball's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Anyone But England
    Posts
    19,999
    Quote Originally Posted by honestbharani View Post
    no.. the predictive path of the hawkeye is not always accurate and need not be, either. We are just ASSUMING that it will show the correct path. And if you need the predictive path to know whether the decision was right/wrong, it is obvious it isn't a howler which, they say, DRS is there to eliminate. Look, LBWs are subjective and they always will be. The more technology aids you have, the more complicated it gets. I am all for using the hawkeye to see where it pitched, where it hit the pad etc. But I am becoming less and less sold to the idea of using the predictive or projected path of the ball every day.
    Can you give some examples of where the predicted path has obviously got it wrong?

  8. #1358
    Global Moderator Prince EWS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Moving to Somalia
    Posts
    43,533
    Quote Originally Posted by honestbharani View Post
    see my post above. Obviously, I want some form of DRS but as I have been saying, I am becoming less and less convinced about using the predictive path technology.


    What I was trying to point out, from my initial post, was that in series where there is no DRS, it makes sense to NOT show the predictive path and hotspot replays. I guess I have done a real lousy job of getting that point across, but that was the point all along.
    In series where there is no DRS they just shouldn't bother playing at all.

  9. #1359
    Hall of Fame Member honestbharani's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Chennai
    Posts
    15,695
    Quote Originally Posted by GingerFurball View Post
    Nah, I can't agree with your opinion at all.

    Sky and Channel 4 have been showing HawkEye graphics for years because the viewers wanted to see them. The difference now is that people get more frustrated when HawkEye shows that an umpire has made a mistake, because there's a system in place to correct such obvious errors that is being obstructed by a single board who are being stupid for some unknown reason.

    Pretty much no-one has complained about the decision Watson got in the last test in the 2nd innings because the option was there for Watson to refer it and he didn't take. When Aleem Dar wrongly reprived Michael Hussey at Brisbane in the 1st Ashes Test, the frustration lay with Strauss for wasting our two previous reviews.
    Again, you are preaching to the choir. I have supported DRS and always have. Right now, I believe we should not use the predictive path technology alone, does not mean I do not want the DRS at all. Just that, if DRS is not being used, it is a good idea to not show those replays.

  10. #1360
    Global Moderator Prince EWS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Moving to Somalia
    Posts
    43,533
    Quote Originally Posted by GingerFurball View Post
    Can you give some examples of where the predicted path has obviously got it wrong?
    Since HawkEye were happy enough with their own technology to suggest it be used as an umpiring aid, there has been just the one (Phil Hughes in Sri Lanka), I believe.

    And look, even if there had been five, that's much fewer than the amount of times a standing umpire has got one obviously wrong in that period.

  11. #1361
    Hall of Fame Member honestbharani's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Chennai
    Posts
    15,695
    Quote Originally Posted by GingerFurball View Post
    Can you give some examples of where the predicted path has obviously got it wrong?
    I am talking about the tests they did back in 2005. If the TV companies show us hawk eye tracking of every ball that hit the sticks or went past them, we will be in a better position to judge. But there have been times when I have felt that hawkeye does not take in the individual factors like bounce off the track etc on that particular session into account..

  12. #1362
    Hall of Fame Member Furball's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Anyone But England
    Posts
    19,999
    Quote Originally Posted by Prince EWS View Post
    See, I still think that's dire. Players shouldn't have to be umpires IMO, and the fact that Watson chose not to refer his lbw doesn't make the decision any less of a blight on the game. But that's a separate debate altogether.
    Yeah, I agree. My point is on the flak umpires take for making mistakes. Had there been no DRS because South Africa were being arsey about it, then I reckon there'd have been some anger at the umpire for getting it wrong, in the same way a few people got pissed off at Billy Bowden when he made a series of inexplicable calls at Lord's.

  13. #1363
    Hall of Fame Member Furball's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Anyone But England
    Posts
    19,999
    Quote Originally Posted by honestbharani View Post
    I am talking about the tests they did back in 2005. If the TV companies show us hawk eye tracking of every ball that hit the sticks or went past them, we will be in a better position to judge. But there have been times when I have felt that hawkeye does not take in the individual factors like bounce off the track etc on that particular session into account..
    Translation: I have no examples, I am just making **** up.

  14. #1364
    Hall of Fame Member honestbharani's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Chennai
    Posts
    15,695
    Quote Originally Posted by Prince EWS View Post
    Since HawkEye were happy enough with their own technology to suggest it be used as an umpiring aid, there has been just the one (Phil Hughes in Sri Lanka), I believe.

    And look, even if there had been five, that's much fewer than the amount of times a standing umpire has got one obviously wrong in that period.
    We will only know about this if they applied hawkeye predictive path tracking after it reaches the batsman for every ball that hit or went past the stumps on a day. I just think there are too many variables for any software to accurately predict where the ball would have gone after impact on the batsman in cricket. Just too many. I am happy to use it for tracking what did happen though, like where it pitched, point of impact etc.

  15. #1365
    Hall of Fame Member honestbharani's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Chennai
    Posts
    15,695
    Quote Originally Posted by GingerFurball View Post
    Translation: I have no examples, I am just making **** up.
    Translation, you were ****ting when they showed the Warne ball in 2005 that bowled Strauss and hawkeye got it wrong by a foot or so.

Page 91 of 125 FirstFirst ... 41818990919293101 ... LastLast


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, 06:15 PM
  2. Sri Lanka Thread
    By chaminda_00 in forum 2009 ICC World Twenty20
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 05-05-2009, 05:29 AM
  3. Trade Discussion Thread
    By Simon in forum World Club Cricket
    Replies: 137
    Last Post: 15-04-2009, 03:15 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
  •