Cricket Player Manager
Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 66
Like Tree17Likes

Thread: DRS: Worth Persevering With?

  1. #31
    International Captain Ruckus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Yes
    Posts
    7,117
    yeah think most things could be improved somewhat but it's still a far better situation than without it. Agree that the no-ball thing is the biggest issues atm though. Takes so much away from the flow of the game.

  2. #32
    International Coach GotSpin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Stranger leering through a pair of binoculars
    Posts
    12,899
    Well they should be checking every ball regardless.

    It's one of the problems with having a DRS system in the first place. It takes away from the excitement and spontaneity of the game and the rechecking of the noball every single time a wicket falls only serves to further exacerbate this situation.
    Mark Waugh
    "He's [Michael Clarke] on Twitter saying sorry for not walking? Mate if he did that in our side there'd be hell to play. AB would chuck his Twitter box off the balcony or whatever it is. Sorry for not walking? Jesus Christ man."
    Knowledge is knowing a tomato is a fruit. Wisdom is knowing not to put it into a fruit salad
    RIP Craigos

  3. #33
    Hall of Fame Member Marcuss's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Above you
    Posts
    15,690
    Just make no-balls automatic innit.

  4. #34
    International Captain Ruckus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Yes
    Posts
    7,117
    Quote Originally Posted by GotSpin View Post
    Well they should be checking every ball regardless.

    It's one of the problems with having a DRS system in the first place. It takes away from the excitement and spontaneity of the game and the rechecking of the noball every single time a wicket falls only serves to further exacerbate this situation.
    I actually quite like the other aspects of DRS from an entertainment pov, sort of similar to hawkeye in tennis I guess. The problem with the no-ball thing is it happens directly after a wicket falls, so it comes across as this massive anticlimax (I can't imagine how annoying it would be for the bowling side to have your emotions toyed with like that). And aside from that a no ball is a pretty trivial thing when it comes down to it, so spending so much time reviewing it is gratuitous. Don't see why they can't just have a camera fixed on the line permanently and have a off field umpire relaying if it's a noball for every delivery in real time.


  5. #35
    International Coach Shri's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    11,181
    Why not have some extra 3 rd umpires who watch the crease and the foot via a fixed camera live(like for run outs) and hit a light or something if its a no ball? They could also look for the waist high no balls. Increase third umpires' man power and responsibilities.

    Edit: Or what he said
    Last edited by Shri; 07-03-2014 at 10:29 PM.

  6. #36
    International Captain Maximas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Footmarks
    Posts
    6,455
    Bit of an issue with fielders getting in the way, not only that but they won't have much time to make their decision, so it could get a bit messy if it's really close and the next ball needs to be bowled. Not only that but the on-field umpire might not be able to give the bowler feedback when they are getting close to the line, which is a bit unfair unless the 3rd ump can communicate that information
    RIP Phillip Hughes (1988-2014)

  7. #37
    International Coach Shri's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    11,181
    Two cameras. Opposite ends.

  8. #38
    International Coach KiWiNiNjA's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    In the kitchen
    Posts
    10,601
    The only problem with DRS is the humans who are using it, both players and officials.

    Most players and captains have figured out how to use the system, although there is still too much "wasting a review over marginal crap". However, 3rd umpires are still rather inept with no consistency whatsoever.

    Umpires need to umpire, the job of reviewing should be a specialist role.
    Also, I would like for communication between umpire and reviewer to be broadcast. It works in football.
    Jono likes this.

  9. #39
    Cricket Web: All-Time Legend Furball's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    #banblocky
    Posts
    20,381
    Quote Originally Posted by KiWiNiNjA View Post
    The only problem with DRS is the humans who are using it, both players and officials.

    Most players and captains have figured out how to use the system, although there is still too much "wasting a review over marginal crap". However, 3rd umpires are still rather inept with no consistency whatsoever.

    Umpires need to umpire, the job of reviewing should be a specialist role.
    Also, I would like for communication between umpire and reviewer to be broadcast. It works in football.
    Definitely agree with the bolded. The commentators are already privy to the discussions between the 3rd umpire and his on-field mate, broadcasting the discussion IMO would make the review process more transparent and would allow constructive criticism of the way the system works. At the moment when there's a strange decision (Khawaja had a terrible decision against him inexplicably upheld at Old Trafford IIRC) then we're guessing as to why the 3rd ump has come to the decision he has.

  10. #40
    U19 12th Man
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Bondi, NSW
    Posts
    260
    Two ideas from baseball's proposed DRS that may be of utility to cricket
    :
    1. Teams will be allowed to view a replay before instigating a referral -- implicit to this, the coach/manager is in control of the decision to refer rather than on-field players. This measure is even easier to implement in cricket since team management sit in-front of tv screens for the duration of the game. Incidentally teams are only given 1 referral plus a bonus referral if the first one is correct. That's it. Honestly you don't need more if you have the opportunity to view it on a replay.

    2. In circumstances where teams don't have any referrals remaining after the 7th inning, the video umpire may still review decisions provided there is "indisputable video evidence" --- this implies a higher standard. This is trickier to interpret in a cricket context - presumably this would apply only to "Stuart Broad" situations and perhaps blatant edges in LBW decisions. However, i'm not sure what is equivalent to "after the 7th inning" in cricket. Something arbitrary like 5 or less wickets or 120 runs to win, 4th innings only?

    Your thoughts please...
    Last edited by Second Spitter; 23-03-2014 at 04:01 AM.

  11. #41
    International Debutant Adders's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    ***RIP THE PRINCE***
    Posts
    2,597
    Quote Originally Posted by Second Spitter View Post

    Your thoughts please...
    I think you've been hacked by Lokomotive.

  12. #42
    International Captain Maximas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Footmarks
    Posts
    6,455
    Quote Originally Posted by Second Spitter View Post
    Two ideas from baseball's proposed DRS that may be of utility to cricket
    :
    1. Teams will be allowed to view a replay before instigating a referral -- implicit to this, the coach/manager is in control of the decision to refer rather than on-field players. This measure is even easier to implement in cricket since team management sit in-front of tv screens for the duration of the game. Incidentally teams are only given 1 referral plus a bonus referral if the first one is correct. That's it. Honestly you don't need more if you have the opportunity to view it on a replay.
    No, too slow, and it might create problems if management think it's too close to call.

    2. In circumstances where teams don't have any referrals remaining after the 7th inning, the video umpire may still review decisions provided there is "indisputable video evidence" --- this implies a higher standard. This is trickier to interpret in a cricket context - presumably this would apply only to "Stuart Broad" situations and perhaps blatant edges in LBW decisions. However, i'm not sure what is equivalent to "after the 7th inning" in cricket. Something arbitrary like 5 or less wickets or 120 runs to win, 4th innings only?
    The DRS is meant to take the really poor decisions out of cricket, and it's up to the players to use implement it in a way that achieves this, if you run out of reviews and you get a howler go against you it's your own team's fault for abusing the system by using it on closer calls or you have poor judgement. In any case there will never be a clear line drawn between 'indisputable evidence' and not enough evidence

  13. #43
    International Coach KiWiNiNjA's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    In the kitchen
    Posts
    10,601
    In baseball they are mainly using the review system for plays at the bases (force/tag), home runs, and catches.
    (yes, I'm ignoring a few other plays for simplicity's sake)

    Comparing to cricket,
    the plays on the bases = run outs
    home runs = boundary or not

    These are already dealt with outside of DRS by going to the 3rd umpire. So it's only really the catches (mainly trap plays) part used in the Baseball Instant Replay that can be directly compared to Cricket's DRS.

    Most of these are things that can be clearly seen by replay and require very little judgement. There is no ball tracking, margins of error, or anything like that.
    It's basically, has he beat the ball?
    has he tagged him in time?
    has it cleared the line?

    All pretty basic compared to cricket, where the biggest use of DRS is for LBW. Also, I think you'll find instant replay in baseball being used very sparingly, and when it is used it will be quite black and white. In cricket however, things are a bit more grey.

    This is all a long winded way of saying "nah, I don't think you can really compare the two."

  14. #44
    Cricket Spectator paulted's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    staffordshire
    Posts
    49
    Line decisions thru DRS and umpires ONLY should be part of the laws but should not be under the purview of any player. This game after all is pretty much THE perfect sport and should not be messed with. I'm prejudiced and love this sport. As far as I'm concerned, if you don't like Cricket you clearly lack intelligence anyway. If football is"the beautiful game" Cricket is a supermodel............

  15. #45
    State Regular YorksLanka's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    945
    i agree with Paulted about our wonderful game but i disagree about DRS and i think that the umpires should be given the full support f the system to help them as its all well us seeing things in slow motion and with the benefit of several replays but the unpires dont get those luxuries...i persnallythink that most of the falws seen are due to the inability of teams being unable to use the system properly and that is their fault..
    Last edited by YorksLanka; 24-03-2014 at 02:41 AM.
    "Play Hard but play fair..."

Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast


Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

Similar Threads

  1. How Much Are These Worth?
    By Prodigy180 in forum General
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 06-10-2013, 10:44 AM
  2. Is this worth the headline?
    By smalishah84 in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 15-09-2011, 12:38 AM
  3. worth it?
    By BlackCap_Fan in forum General
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 31-01-2004, 07:12 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
  •