Page 200 of 273 FirstFirst ... 100150190198199200201202210250 ... LastLast
Results 2,986 to 3,000 of 4083

Thread: ***Official*** South Africa in New Zealand 2012

  1. #2986
    International Captain straw man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    l
    Posts
    6,219
    Some total moron on the radio, forgotten his name, repeating that old misunderstanding that lbw when hit on the full means the umpire has to suddenly assume the ball will go straight, as in wicket-to-wicket line.

  2. #2987
    Request Your Custom Title Now! Flem274*'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    ksfls;fsl;lsFJg/s
    Posts
    28,449
    Can we at least let Williamson score a fifty please?
    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

  3. #2988
    International Captain straw man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    l
    Posts
    6,219
    Quote Originally Posted by Flem274* View Post
    Can we at least let Williamson score a fifty please?
    Will do it in edges at this rate. But yeah, that would be good.

  4. #2989
    International 12th Man
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    England
    Posts
    1,747
    It's surely got to reach a point soon where the owners of Hawkeye start making some sort of noises about VirtualEye. It's cr*p! But because 99% of viewers (and players?) assume they're all the same system, Hawkeye's reputation gets damaged by Virtual Eye's dubious performance. The tracking on that LBW just looked all wrong, which rarely happens with Hawkeye.

    Do the two systems actually supposedly work on the same basis, or are there actual technical differences? Do they treat swing in the same way, for example?


  5. #2990
    Global Moderator Spark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    A Blood Rainbow
    Posts
    32,501
    If Steyn is genuinely getting controlled reverse then this could be pure carnage.

    EDIT: oops. only two balls left.

    Tomorrow morning, then.
    Last edited by Spark; 15-03-2012 at 11:00 PM.
    + time's fickle card game ~ with you and i +


    get ready for a broken ****in' arm

  6. #2991
    International 12th Man
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    England
    Posts
    1,747
    Quote Originally Posted by straw man View Post
    Some total moron on the radio, forgotten his name, repeating that old misunderstanding that lbw when hit on the full means the umpire has to suddenly assume the ball will go straight, as in wicket-to-wicket line.
    I'm not sure what the situation is here with swing - do they have to assume no further swing after the ball hits the pad? I know they are supposed to assume no spin for spinners if the ball hasn't bounced (for obvious reasons).

  7. #2992
    International Vice-Captain BeeGee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    4,861
    Quote Originally Posted by Flem274* View Post
    About ****ing time.

    Now how badly will we **** our second innings up?
    Pretty bad.

  8. #2993
    International Captain thierry henry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Auckland, New Zealand
    Posts
    5,297
    Quote Originally Posted by greg View Post
    It's surely got to reach a point soon where the owners of Hawkeye start making some sort of noises about VirtualEye. It's cr*p! But because 99% of viewers (and players?) assume they're all the same system, Hawkeye's reputation gets damaged by Virtual Eye's dubious performance. The tracking on that LBW just looked all wrong, which rarely happens with Hawkeye.

    Do the two systems actually supposedly work on the same basis, or are there actual technical differences? Do they treat swing in the same way, for example?
    Yep. The path Taylor's lbw took on VirtualEye seemed to be completely devoid of the very obvious swing. Also, somehow it managed to get the impact point wrong. It was outrageous tbh, I honestly think that was missing.

  9. #2994
    Global Moderator Spark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    A Blood Rainbow
    Posts
    32,501
    Quote Originally Posted by greg View Post
    I'm not sure what the situation is here with swing - do they have to assume no further swing after the ball hits the pad? I know they are supposed to assume no spin for spinners if the ball hasn't bounced (for obvious reasons).
    Yes. Once it hits the pad, it's assumed to go on straight.

  10. #2995
    International Captain thierry henry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Auckland, New Zealand
    Posts
    5,297
    Quote Originally Posted by Spark View Post
    Yes. Once it hits the pad, it's assumed to go on straight.
    Yes but the path Steyn's ball was on BEFORE hitting the pad was taking it sharply from off to leg, in this case surely the continuation of that path would have it clipping leg at best

  11. #2996
    Request Your Custom Title Now! Flem274*'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    ksfls;fsl;lsFJg/s
    Posts
    28,449
    Radiosport denying they have an infatuation with fast bowling.

  12. #2997
    Cricketer Of The Year Hurricane's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Don't be jealous of the HRV cup
    Posts
    9,947
    Quote Originally Posted by greg View Post
    I'm not sure what the situation is here with swing - do they have to assume no further swing after the ball hits the pad? I know they are supposed to assume no spin for spinners if the ball hasn't bounced (for obvious reasons).
    My understanding is that the ball will continue its current trajectory - so if it is a big hooping inswinger then you assume it will continue at the same angle - but not that it will swing even more.

    umpiring in club games this is a common source of controversy.
    Quote Originally Posted by HeathDavisSpeed View Post
    I got great enjoyment in going to the game and shouting "WHY THE **** ISN'T THIS GAME BEING PLAYED AT THE BASIN?!>!?!?" to reasonably significant cheers from the sparse crowd
    Proudly against the bring back Bennett movement since he is injury prone and won't last 5 days.

  13. #2998
    International Captain straw man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    l
    Posts
    6,219
    Quote Originally Posted by greg View Post
    It's surely got to reach a point soon where the owners of Hawkeye start making some sort of noises about VirtualEye. It's cr*p! But because 99% of viewers (and players?) assume they're all the same system, Hawkeye's reputation gets damaged by Virtual Eye's dubious performance. The tracking on that LBW just looked all wrong, which rarely happens with Hawkeye.

    Do the two systems actually supposedly work on the same basis, or are there actual technical differences? Do they treat swing in the same way, for example?
    Mostly agree - isn't the ICC supposed to be getting independent testing of these systems done at the moment?

    Also the Hawkeye guys have been proactive in talking about the pros and cons of the system and how they're improving things - seem like a professional outfit. Less sure about Virtual Eye.

  14. #2999
    Cricketer Of The Year Hurricane's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Don't be jealous of the HRV cup
    Posts
    9,947
    Quote Originally Posted by Spark View Post
    Yes. Once it hits the pad, it's assumed to go on straight.
    post the law...if you have the time.

  15. #3000
    International Captain straw man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    l
    Posts
    6,219
    Quote Originally Posted by greg View Post
    I'm not sure what the situation is here with swing - do they have to assume no further swing after the ball hits the pad? I know they are supposed to assume no spin for spinners if the ball hasn't bounced (for obvious reasons).
    Yeah no further swing assumed after impact. What the guy on the radio was saying was that if full toss the umpire should suddenly the assume the ball is going to miraculously travel a wicket-to-wicket line. ie. parallel to the path between middle stump at one end and middle stump at the other.

    It's just amazing that a commentator who is supposed to know the game can think this.



Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

Similar Threads

  1. *Official* Match 39 - Bangladesh v South Africa
    By James in forum World Cup 2011
    Replies: 161
    Last Post: 20-03-2011, 12:49 PM
  2. Group A - South Africa, Mexico, Uruguay, France
    By James in forum 2010 Football World Cup - South Africa
    Replies: 322
    Last Post: 24-06-2010, 05:48 AM
  3. India v South Africa Tests
    By James in forum Fantasy Cricket
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 02-02-2010, 05:22 PM
  4. South Africa v England Twenty20s
    By James in forum Fantasy Cricket
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 01-11-2009, 07:50 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
  •