Tony Greig - Cowdrey Lecture

[benchmark00]

If you can't place trust in an outcome? It's not a scientific experiment ffs. The whole point is that you don't know who will win, and when there is an outcome, you have no idea if it will be the same the next time they play. That's the beauty of sport.

 

[silentstriker]

If you can't place trust in an outcome? It's not a scientific experiment ffs. The whole point is that you don't know who will win, and when there is an outcome, you have no idea if it will be the same the next time they play. That's the beauty of sport.

Yes, when you can't trust the outcome.

You don't know who will win if someone is cheating is either, unless you're in on it. The point is that you trust the outcome if it's the players ability, their successes and their failures which decide the outcome. Not a third entity that is not one of the teams and shouldn't change the outcome by themselves. It has nothing to do with a scientific experiment nor am I trying to make it as such.

Historically we had to rely on the authority of umpires because there was nothing else. They aren't part of the sport - they are a necessary evil for lack of a better alternative. Now that such alternatives are beginning to be viable, we should use such a thing whenever possible - and good riddance to unfair decisions.

 

[benchmark00]

So we should take out umpires all together and implement cyclops technology that we see in tennis on the service line etc? Rubbish.

I prefer the little differences certain umpires bring to the game. Some you know are going to be stiff on LBW's whilst others give aggressive decisions.

What I think you and others don't see is that there's a difference between 'unfair' and 'incorrect'.

 

[Furball]

So we should take out umpires all together and implement cyclops technology that we see in tennis on the service line etc? Rubbish.

I prefer the little differences certain umpires bring to the game. Some you know are going to be stiff on LBW's whilst others give aggressive decisions.

What I think you and others don't see is that there's a difference between 'unfair' and 'incorrect'.

And that's fine provided that in being cautious or aggressive the umpires aren't getting things wrong.

 

[silentstriker]

So we should take out umpires all together and implement cyclops technology that we see in tennis on the service line etc? Rubbish.

If we can pull if off - yes. Right now unfortunately, we still need them for some things. Eventually - absolutely (for decisions at least), though I think you may need to keep them there to settle disputes between players, hold the hats, keep track of overs and such, and other such administrative work.

What I think you and others don't see is that there's a difference between 'unfair' and 'incorrect'.

When it comes to the outcome of games, I consider incorrect to be the same as unfair.

 

[Jono]

The only reason Benchy wants umpires still in the game is so he can press the Howzat button on Super International Cricket.

 

[Jono]

Leg byeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee

 

[uvelocity]

If we can pull if off - yes.

is it you who is in favour of an ice hockey/cricket hybrid sport?

 

[Jono]

Yeah he's the bloke.

 

[uvelocity]

Well I like the idea too, but my question is how can cyclops determine if its an illegal tackle?

 

[Top_Cat]

haha, such an ideological split between Bench**** and Silent Stri****.

For what it's worth, at lower levels I'm not so hot on the accuracy thing but when it comes to FC and Tests, with careers and livelihoods on the line, moar accuracy please.

 

[ankitj]

The most frustrating part of UDRS fan boys is that they refuse to acknowledge and understand the other point of view.

This.

I was firmly in UDRS camp, I still am largely but have got some doubts crept in my mind. But I keep it to myself mostly because of the weird reactions that we get for voicing such opinions.

Guess what this situation is like? It is like suggesting that Bradman would have averaged 75 instead of 100 today. Gets same weird reactions.

#startofsachinvsbradman
#randomhashtagsftw

 

[intcricket]

Tony Greig would be a very credible man.................................................................. if idiots were running the game of cricket. Although I'm not sure if even they would agree to this two-faced nonsense, from a man who sold his soul to Kerry Packer and then, went to ICL and destroyed careers.

Ironical for a man in clear conflict of interest with the ICC to be invited to speak at the "Spirit of Cricket" lecture.

One-eyed arse.

 

[benchmark00]

Tony Greig would be a very credible man.................................................................. if idiots were running the game of cricket. Although I'm not sure if even they would agree to this two-faced nonsense, from a man who sold his soul to Kerry Packer and then, went to ICL and destroyed careers.

Ironical for a man in clear conflict of interest with the ICC to be invited to speak at the "Spirit of Cricket" lecture.

One-eyed arse.

If you have two eyes in your arse then you should consult your medical professional ASAP.

 

[ankitj]

if idiots were running the game of cricket.

They are.

 

[Jono]

If you have two eyes in your arse then you should consult your medical professional ASAP.

Benchehhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

 

[benchmark00]

Decent arm tbf.

 

[intcricket]

If you have two eyes in your arse then you should consult your medical professional ASAP.

 

[benchmark00]

The only reason Benchy wants umpires still in the game is so he can press the Howzat button on Super International Cricket.

If you appeal enough the computer sometimes takes a run.

Always amused me when the umpy signals a four his arms grows about 10 inches.

 

[benchmark00]

If you appeal enough the computer sometimes takes a run.

Always amused me when the umpy signals a four his arms grows about 10 inches.

Shown below: