-
Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
***Official*** England in New Zealand series 2013
- Thread starter NZTailender
- Start date
NZTailender
I can't believe I ate the whole thing
if the first 3 seamers can't do their jobs, what will a 4th do? If Southee were out I might agree that 4 seamers to cover but Southee, Boult and Bracewell are our best and can take 20 wickets. Them plus Martin as the spinner is a good attack (not great, but good).
Bahnz
Hall of Fame Member
Athlai
Not Terrible
Utter bull****. Why the **** should we even bother to use technology if we're simply not going to trust it. Well there was a sound there, we don't know where it came from, nothing else including the batsman's impression seem to indicate he hit that. Ah **** it I don't know lets just give him out.
No. The technology said there was no reason for him to be out. **** off.
No. The technology said there was no reason for him to be out. **** off.
Cabinet96
Global Moderator
I thought there was something at the bottom of the bat. But I didn't think it was conclusively ball on bat.
grecian
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Don't be silly, the fact it, it was given out by the umpire, the sound means that can't be definitely wrong, so no reason to change the decision.
KiWiNiNjA
International Coach
But the way they treat hotspot, will there ever be enough evidence?
That's what I was thinking as soon as he went for the review.
Mark on hotspot = out
No mark on hotspot = out
Athlai
Not Terrible
Noise can be anything, we have no idea where the noise came from just knowledge that the noise happened at a time where the ball was around the bat.
The technology we have in place is to see if the camera can show the ball hitting the bat, and failing clear evidence there we use hotspot to show any sign of the bat clearing hitting the ball.
Noise is what the wicket was given for but it was by no means conclusive evidence of anything at all. There was no sign of bat hitting ball and thats what a caught wicket needs to be given on.
The technology we have in place is to see if the camera can show the ball hitting the bat, and failing clear evidence there we use hotspot to show any sign of the bat clearing hitting the ball.
Noise is what the wicket was given for but it was by no means conclusive evidence of anything at all. There was no sign of bat hitting ball and thats what a caught wicket needs to be given on.
hendrix
Hall of Fame Member
Hot spot showing an edge can be pretty definitive.
It comes into its own in terms of inside edges in LBW decisions.
But absence of an edge is not definitive enough. There have been clear cases where hotspot has not shown an edge when there has certainly been one.
It's a tool that can be used in combination with other tools.