*Official* Second Test at Lord's

[Jarquis]

Yeah, with these I think people need to appreciate the 3rd umpire gets clear images and isolated sound and so probably are in the best situation to be making the decision. According to Aggers, Tony Hill was convinced there was a cleard deflection and a definite noise. That's pretty conclusive evidence to overturn imo. So long as its the truth ofc

 

[pup11]

thought he smashed it

That was out, but tbt when hot-stop is the primary aide for giving someone out or not-out than the decision should be made through hot-stop only, for example there was no way Hughes should have been given out in the 1st innings, since there was no nick on hot-spot, if you are going to give people out on sound or by looking at the actual replay then why at all have hot-spot.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

I think he hit it too but hotspot is worthless and any review system involving it is a joke.

 

[ajdude]

It's impossible to tell. From Hughes onwards hotspot has basically been useless. I think the TV ump has made the right call but I'm not gonna get too upset about people who complain

 

[greg]

It's impossible to tell. From Hughes onwards hotspot has basically been useless. I think the TV ump has made the right call but I'm not gonna get too upset about people who complain

I think complaints should centre on the DRS process as usual. I'm certain he was out.

 

[Jarquis]

If you are using hotspot you can't simply ignore it. TBH I am less convinced about hotspot as this game goes on. Snicko seems far more reliable.

Spot (in almost all circumstances) = edge
No spot (in a wide range of circumstances) =! No edge

 

[GIMH]

I think he hit it too but hotspot is worthless and any review system involving it is a joke.

It's not worthless. I think the point EWS made bears repeating. It's not definitive when there's no mark but very useful when there is a mark.

 

[91Jmay]

That was out, but tbt when hot-stop is the primary aide for giving someone out or not-out than the decision should be made through hot-stop only, for example there was no way Hughes should have been given out in the 1st innings, since there was no nick on hot-spot, if you are going to give people out on sound or by looking at the actual replay then why at all have hot-spot.

Nah you're wrong on the Hughes one. He was given out on the field, if there is then a noise on replay it stays out IMO.

 

[Expressway76]

Yeah, with these I think people need to appreciate the 3rd umpire gets clear images and isolated sound and so probably are in the best situation to be making the decision. According to Aggers, Tony Hill was convinced there was a cleard deflection and a definite noise. That's pretty conclusive evidence to overturn imo. So long as its the truth ofc

Indeed. It just looked out on the slow mo, clear deflection.

 

[LegionOfBrad]

Holding getting angry and not realising there are only a finite number of frames on a camera shot.

 

[Furball]

I can't believe people are falling into the 'hotspot is infallible' trap again.

I've got the commentary coming through the kitchen window and I can hear the nick.

 

[greg]

The thing is that despite all the complaints i think it can be argued that there has only actually been one clearly wrong decision impacting on the discussion about DRS in the whole series. And that was as a result of Clarke unnecessarily using up a review. (the Trott one is debateable but centres more on whether the third umpire should have over-ruled, not on whether he was actually out or not). So a lot of heat has been generated in discussion, but nothing that can really say that DRS is a bad thing or isn't working.

 

[pup11]

Nah you're wrong on the Hughes one. He was given out on the field, if there is then a noise on replay it stays out IMO.

So what, since there was nothing on the hot-spot that decision should have been overturned, that's how the system should work, going into this whole snicko, sound or deflection business opens up a grey area which nobody wants.

 

[Jarquis]

So what, since there was nothing on the hot-spot that decision should have been overturned, that's how the system should work, going into this whole snicko, sound or deflection business opens up a grey area which nobody wants.

Go away.

 

[Furball]

I'd much rather trust audio than hotspot.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

It's not worthless. I think the point EWS made bears repeating. It's not definitive when there's no mark but very useful when there is a mark.

I don't think you can use a piece of technology when it is only definitive in one direction. If the on field decision is out it is basically impossible to successfully review if no hotspot mark is not evidence of no edge and its the primary piece of tech to find an edge.

At least bring snicko into it.

 

[Woodster]

You don't have to use just one particular thing as definitive though. It would be foolish to go solely off what Hotspot says if you ignore contrary evidence such as noise and clear deflections. Surely it makes sense to weigh up all the information you have seen and heard and make an educated decision on the strength of the evidence you have ?

 

[Garson007]

guys i'm watching golf what do i do

Be mesmerised about how badly Woods is going the wrong way.

 

[greg]

So what, since there was nothing on the hot-spot that decision should have been overturned, that's how the system should work, going into this whole snicko, sound or deflection business opens up a grey area which nobody wants.

Whoever said that hotspot has to be the be all and end all? Not the ICC. Remember that hotspot has value to the third umpire not just for showing edges on the bat. It also shows other marks eg. when a possible inside edge is just bat hitting pad, or a noise is likely to be caused by the ball hitting the pad/shirt. When bat and ball are miles away from the body and there is a clear sound, and an apparent deflection then that really should be considered pretty conclusive.

After all there are provisions for DRS to be used even when hotspot isn't available.

 

[silentstriker]

I don't think you can use a piece of technology when it is only definitive in one direction. If the on field decision is out it is basically impossible to successfully review if no hotspot mark is not evidence of no edge and its the primary piece of tech to find an edge.

At least bring snicko into it.

Why not? DRS is designed to get rid of the howlers. If there is a clear spot and the umpire has given it wrong, that's a clear use.