Hawkeye: More fallible than they'd like us to think.

[marc71178]

90% accuracy in umpiring decisions mean precisely that - that 1 out of 10 decisions, on average, is wrong.

So how many decisions are you saying that they have to make in a game, then, because it's sure more than 20 or 30.

 

[C_C]

So how many decisions are you saying that they have to make in a game, then, because it's sure more than 20 or 30.

Surely, if you've watched Test cricket, you know that normally there is atleast 60-70 good shouts per match ( where all 4 innings are completed or almost completed).

That makes for 6-7 wrong calls per test.
Pretty deplorable !

 

[marc71178]

And how many umpires make 6 or 7 mistakes a game?

 

[C_C]

And how many umpires make 6 or 7 mistakes a game?

Would seem most according to the study undertaken last year.

 

[Scaly piscine]

You're forgetting that there are two umpires so they'd only need to produce 6-7 mistakes between the pair of them, not each.

 

[silentstriker]

You're forgetting that there are two umpires so they'd only need to produce 6-7 mistakes between the pair of them, not each.

Yes, but they also need to make half the total decisions per person. So the mistake rate is the same (percentage wise).

 

[marc71178]

Would seem most according to the study undertaken last year.

What study is this?

I've searched Cricinfo, and the only thing that mentioned a percentage I could find was Bob Woolmer's rant, when he said 90%.

 

[Scaly piscine]

Yes, but they also need to make half the total decisions per person. So the mistake rate is the same (percentage wise).

That's utterly irrelevant to the posts above going on about one umpire making 6-7 mistakes a game.

 

[silentstriker]

That's utterly irrelevant to the posts above going on about one umpire making 6-7 mistakes a game.

You need to re-read what C_C said, he said "60-70 shouts per match" not, "60-70 shouts per umpire".

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

Err no.
That was the number quoted sometime last year in a crickinfo article...i think the exact number was between 90 and 93% or so.

The number is 95% and that number does not truly reflect the standard of umpiring. Umpires such as Taufel do a lot to make up for the lacklustre Bucknor.

95% is almost certainly, in my mind, a number that the ICC umpires panel have made up to suit their cause.

ICC's Elite Panel Not Reliable Anymore

 

[Richard]

The number is 95% and that number does not truly reflect the standard of umpiring. Umpires such as Taufel do a lot to make up for the lacklustre Bucknor.

95% is almost certainly, in my mind, a number that the ICC umpires panel have made up to suit their cause.

ICC's Elite Panel Not Reliable Anymore

No good Umpiring can ever make-up for poor Umpiring.
And I'll say it again - Bucknor has been nowhere near as bad this last year as he was the 3 years before that.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

No good Umpiring can ever make-up for poor Umpiring.

I meant in terms of stats.

 

[marc71178]

But what about the first chance umpire percentages?!

 

[Scaly piscine]

You need to re-read what C_C said, he said "60-70 shouts per match" not, "60-70 shouts per umpire".

Surely, if you've watched Test cricket, you know that normally there is atleast 60-70 good shouts per match ( where all 4 innings are completed or almost completed).

That makes for 6-7 wrong calls per test. - C_C

And how many umpires make 6 or 7 mistakes a game? - marc

Would seem most according to the study undertaken last year. - C_C

You're forgetting that there are two umpires so they'd only need to produce 6-7 mistakes between the pair of them, not each. - Me


The 6-7 mistakes per game was accepted and I pointed out the flaw in the logic. I've no idea what you're going on about but it's irrelevant anyway. This is my last post on this particular borefest to preserve the sanity of CW members.


Edit: I should have said 6-7 mistakes per umpire

 

[C_C]

The 6-7 mistakes per game was accepted and I pointed out the flaw in the logic. I've no idea what you're going on about but it's irrelevant anyway. This is my last post on this particular borefest to preserve the sanity of CW members.

Where exactly is there a flaw in the logic ? 6-7 mistakes outta 60-70 shouts is still just as bad as 3-4 mistakes outta 30-35 shouts.

 

[Dick Rockett]

I have yet to see a significant valid argument against Hawkeye being used in some capacity, it all just seems to be random mudslinging from doomsayers hoping that one of their criticisms manages to stick.

This is my last post on this particular borefest to preserve the sanity of CW members.

No! Please keep posting on here! Without you, how are we to know just how wrong we are? How are we to know if we are ourselves posting up to your lofty standards? We need you, O wise counsel.

 

[marc71178]

Where exactly is there a flaw in the logic ? 6-7 mistakes outta 60-70 shouts is still just as bad as 3-4 mistakes outta 30-35 shouts.

Where is this article that you've quoted?

 

[Richard]

But what about the first chance umpire percentages?!

Err, yes, keep on banging-on about some phrase you've created by messing around putting various words into various places.
You'll still never get anywhere.

 

[marc71178]

Yet you seem to think you will

 

[Richard]

Err, no, I don't try.