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 99 of 125 FirstFirst ... 4989979899100101109 ... LastLast
Results 1,471 to 1,485 of 1874
Like Tree8Likes

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

  1. #1471
    International Debutant hazsa19's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Buckingham
    Posts
    2,244
    Quote Originally Posted by uvelocity View Post
    no. umpires have been generally right, if they can't tell for sure that it's definitely out, it's not out. Taking into account doubt does not make it a wrong decision.

    You can't remove the doubt except with hawkeye, and that means a different decision in top level cricket compared to every other level of the game.

    The umpires call ruling, with the amounts of tolerance in where hawkeye thinks the ball would strike or not strike the stumps does not reflect the benefit of the doubt in the way it's been applied in the past, and in other grades of cricket.

    Here's one example; ball strikes bat and pad together, appeal, not out, review. Slow mo replay shows the ball hit pad first by a fraction of a second. overturned, out. Right decision was made, but in all of history, and in every park and field in the cricket world the right decision was not out, because it was impossible to say for sure. I'd rather it was given not out.

    Now if the ball pitches a foot outside leg and it's given, reviewed, overturned - I have no problem with that reversal, as it's an umpring blunder which is clear, and shouldn't occur in a perfect world.
    Nonsense. Everyone on the cricketing planet knows that it hit pad first and you want to give the batsman benefit because of some sentimental attachment to the way things used to be?

    What about run-outs? The batsman pushes one to cover and sets off, the fielder scores with direct hit; removing the bails with the bat an inch short of the crease. In the old days, it's not out. In village cricket, it's not out (hopefully), in Test Cricket it is referred and the correct decision is made.

    Personally, I don't see the difference.
    Quote Originally Posted by GIMH View Post
    Just think, if we'd bowled them out for zero we'd still be struggling

  2. #1472
    International Coach morgieb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Dishing out broken ****ing floggings
    Posts
    11,195
    HawkEye's still more accurate than your eyesight though...
    5-0

    RIP Craig Walsh (Craig) 1985-2012

    Proudly supporting the #2 cricketer of all time.

  3. #1473
    International Coach uvelocity's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    seamy road
    Posts
    11,871
    Quote Originally Posted by hazsa19 View Post
    Nonsense. Everyone on the cricketing planet knows that it hit pad first and you want to give the batsman benefit because of some sentimental attachment to the way things used to be?

    What about run-outs? The batsman pushes one to cover and sets off, the fielder scores with direct hit; removing the bails with the bat an inch short of the crease. In the old days, it's not out. In village cricket, it's not out (hopefully), in Test Cricket it is referred and the correct decision is made.

    Personally, I don't see the difference.
    That's a pretty **** first paragraph, it's not what I said at all. Quite the opposite. And I don't just mean amateur cricket. How about kids playing, learning the game, moving to age grade rep teams, through to first class cricket, and then the application of a rule is completely different when they make it to the top.

    Although your point regarding runouts is quite a good comparison.
    Quote Originally Posted by sledger View Post
    I just love all kinds of balls.

  4. #1474
    International Captain wellAlbidarned's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    away from the palms
    Posts
    6,400
    The rules don't change once you get to the top level though, they just get enforced better.
    Exit pursuing a beer


  5. #1475
    International Coach uvelocity's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    seamy road
    Posts
    11,871
    must be speaking french

  6. #1476
    Request Your Custom Title Now! Flem274*'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    ksfls;fsl;lsFJg/s
    Posts
    28,558
    This sums up my thoughts nicely.

    The eventual decision to use it was explained frankly by Richardson. "The bottom line is that they are going to be more consistent and more accurate than the human eye, that is just natural," he said. "So when Jacques Kallis says that 99% of the players don't support it, I don't think he's correct."
    New Zealand v South Africa, 1st Test, 5th day: DRS to continue in New Zealand-South Africa Tests | Cricket News | New Zealand v South Africa | ESPN Cricinfo

    DRS isn't perfect, but umpires are far, far worse.

    Nonsensical for NZ to be against it as well considering half the cricketing world judges Vettori lbw appeals taking into account turn he doesn't get and New Zealand would have lost at Hobart without it.
    Quote Originally Posted by Athlai View Post
    Jeets doesn't really deserve to be bowling.
    Quote Originally Posted by Athlai View Post
    Well yeah Tendy is probably better than Bradman, but Bradman was 70 years ago, if he grew up in the modern era he'd still easily be the best. Though he wasn't, can understand the argument for Tendy even though I don't agree.
    Proudly supporting Central Districts
    RIP Craig Walsh

  7. #1477
    Hall of Fame Member honestbharani's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Chennai
    Posts
    15,695
    Quote Originally Posted by wellAlbidarned View Post
    The LBW rule states that when the batsman is hit on the full (or very close to it) the umpire must assume that the ball would travel straight on.

    Hawkeye doesn't need to be able to predict stuff like that because it hasn't happened.
    yes.. Hawkeye is predicting stuff that hasn't happened and the people in the game are not convinced it is making the most reasonable guesses.. It is really not that hard to understand.
    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

  8. #1478
    Hall of Fame Member honestbharani's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Chennai
    Posts
    15,695
    Quote Originally Posted by Scaly piscine View Post
    Could you actually back one of your arguments up with something other than hearsay. This is BCCI level criticism so far.

    In general it's not that difficult to predict the path of the ball when your tracking is as accurate as it is shown for Hawkeye. Seeing the ball bounce and joining the dots for the height when it passes the stumps is not difficult, yet people still constantly criticise Hawkeye on it. We know that there is a bigger margin of error where the ball pitched close to the point of contact, we can figure out other things that will make the margin bigger. But that isn't the issue here. People are making baseless statements about not trusting the bounce, or nonsense about it being a guess that is as flawed as a human...
    How exactly can you prove a prediction wrong? It is a question of what people's mind thinks would likely have happened Vs what technology thinks would likely have happened... And the guys who played the game at a million levels higher than you even think you did, are saying they don't think it is making the most likely guesses... Of course, you know better than the folks who play at the highest level possible for a living...

  9. #1479
    Hall of Fame Member honestbharani's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Chennai
    Posts
    15,695
    Quote Originally Posted by hazsa19 View Post
    This would be interesting if it wasn't completely wrong
    This reply to your post would be worth something if your post actually had a point...

  10. #1480
    Hall of Fame Member honestbharani's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Chennai
    Posts
    15,695
    Quote Originally Posted by hazsa19 View Post
    Technology going wrong/ breaking from time to time is a very different argument to the one you have been making. I would hope that technicians identify when things go wrong and work hard to ensure that specific problem doesn't happen again.

    That does not mean it should not be used. Find me a technology that never ever breaks down for whatever reason? Technology is still more reliable that humans.
    yes, when it comes to showing what happened or doing repeated tasks... Technology IS NOT PROVEN to be better than humans in processing tracked information and making accurate assumptions and likely guesses... If it was, we would be having robots running countries and corporations, not people..

  11. #1481
    Hall of Fame Member honestbharani's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Chennai
    Posts
    15,695
    Quote Originally Posted by hazsa19 View Post
    How many bad decisions has DRS corrected?
    I am not against DRS.. and from that interview, neither is Kallis. All we are saying is, lets use the ball tracking to show where it pitched and where it hit and then allow the guessing to the 3rd umpire... That is ALL we are saying.

  12. #1482
    Hall of Fame Member honestbharani's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Chennai
    Posts
    15,695
    Quote Originally Posted by hazsa19 View Post
    Honestly have no clue what your point is regarding umpiring in lower levels of cricket?

    "DRS shouldn't be employed 'cos they don't have it on village greens." Is that it the point? I hope not
    The point is simple.. HOw is hawkeye assumed to be more accurate than an umpire's judgement on a LBW which is a GUESS? Let's see the hawkeye of every ball that is bowled, stop it a couple of yards after pitching and have hawk eye predict where it would go and see where it actually went. I know this is how they were SUPPOSED to have tested it but I don't see any hard evidence of it. IF the technology is so right, then show it off with actual proof.


    For a group who keep asserting technology PROVES people are out, there is sure very little proof of how right hawkeye really is with balls that actually do have an actual path to be predicted against..

  13. #1483
    Request Your Custom Title Now! Flem274*'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    ksfls;fsl;lsFJg/s
    Posts
    28,558
    Quote Originally Posted by honestbharani View Post
    Technology IS NOT PROVEN to be better than humans in processing tracked information and making accurate assumptions and likely guesses
    One uses mathematics, the other uses this.

    Number four is especially important. It might even explain why the whole wicket off a no ball thing is becoming increasingly apparent, since the umpire can't fully concentrate on the delivery and the bowlers foot.

  14. #1484
    Quote Originally Posted by honestbharani View Post
    How exactly can you prove a prediction wrong? It is a question of what people's mind thinks would likely have happened Vs what technology thinks would likely have happened... And the guys who played the game at a million levels higher than you even think you did, are saying they don't think it is making the most likely guesses... Of course, you know better than the folks who play at the highest level possible for a living...
    What they're doing for a living is irrelevant, because they know no more about Hawkeye or equivalent than anyone on this forum. Kallis should be embarrassed at his comments when he can't even be bothered to go and find out about the system.

    On one hand you have Shrek quoting random percentages off the top of his head - the same one that has hairs implanted into it after years of scientific research so he could look less like a tit. On the other you have scientists who've been doing this for years and the fact that they've got such a system in place at all should tell you they know what they're doing.

    Now who am I going to back? I'm amazed at people can even debate this.

    This is scientifically researched. If you want to question this on a scientific level then by all means. But you're just talking complete **** like Kallis. Making it up as you go along. How the hell you can go on like you or him know more about this than the scientists who developed it is unbelievable. It's this sort of thinking that means we get people going to a witch doctor instead of a medical scientist. It's an argument of blind faith against science. For whatever reason something in your head tells you to be perverse just for the hell of it.
    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

  15. #1485
    International Coach G.I.Joe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    India
    Posts
    10,947
    Quote Originally Posted by morgieb View Post
    HawkEye's still more accurate than your eyesight though...
    The amount of time you spend in the bathroom, it's certainly a whole lot better than your eyesight, morgie.

    Quote Originally Posted by Athlai View Post
    If GI 'Best Poster On The Forum' Joe says it then it must be true.
    Athlai doesn't lie. And he doesn't do sarcasm either, so you know it's true!



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
  •