• 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.

No Hot Spot

benchmark00

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Snicko takes too long,

As for the white spot in the Boxing Day Test, what is your point? It was clear that the white spot wasn't caused by the ball, so it's totally irrelevant.
Firstly, thanks captain obvious re: snicko. If you had read my earlier posts on this topic you will note that I said spend money on getting it up to speed.

Secondly, my point about the white spot is that where did the white spot come from? It wasn't the pad and it wasn't the ball. So one day that will result in an incorrect decision. If they're going to use the technology they have to trust it. If they trusted it they would've given Pietersen out. The fact is that it can't be trusted and it's a rubbish piece of technology for this application.
 

Daemon

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Firstly, thanks captain obvious re: snicko. If you had read my earlier posts on this topic you will note that I said spend money on getting it up to speed.

Secondly, my point about the white spot is that where did the white spot come from? It wasn't the pad and it wasn't the ball. So one day that will result in an incorrect decision. If they're going to use the technology they have to trust it. If they trusted it they would've given Pietersen out. The fact is that it can't be trusted and it's a rubbish piece of technology for this application.
So if such a coincidence were to happen that there somehow was a white spot exactly where the ball may or may not have taken the edge, can't the same be argued about snicko as well? What if the batsmen farts at the exact same time as the ball passes the bat?
 

benchmark00

Request Your Custom Title Now!
So if such a coincidence were to happen that there somehow was a white spot exactly where the ball may or may not have taken the edge, can't the same be argued about snicko as well? What if the batsmen farts at the exact same time as the ball passes the bat?
See that's the thing, flatulence being emitted from the anal cavity would show up as a completely different visual representation on the snicko reading.

The ball taking the edge makes a sharp, high wave length, whereas hitting the pad or a fart, for example, would make a flatter sound.

Snicko is definitely more reliable. You're never just hoping there's a noise (or a spot in Hot Spot's case), there always is something.

I'm happy enough to use hot spot as a back up, but it's an inferior piece of technology for this purpose imo.
 
Last edited:

Daemon

Request Your Custom Title Now!
See that's the thing, flatulence being emitted from the anal cavity would show up as a completely different visual representation on the snicko reading.

The ball taking the edge makes a sharp, high wave length, whereas hitting the pad or a fart, for example, would make a flatter sound.

Snicko is definitely more reliable. You're never just hoping there's a noise (or a spot in Hot Spot's case), there always is something.

I'm happy enough to use hot spot as a back up, but it's an inferior piece of technology for this purpose imo.
Hmm, hadn't thought of that. Would the bat hitting the ground show up a distinguishably different wave length on the snicko? If it does then I guess you're right. (was only joking about the fart though 8-))
 

Spark

Global Moderator
benchmark00 is correct above. Refer to Bell at Sydney where it was obvious to all and sundry that he had whacked it, but Hot Spot showed nothing.
 

benchmark00

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Hmm, hadn't thought of that. Would the bat hitting the ground show up a distinguishably different wave length on the snicko? If it does then I guess you're right. (was only joking about the fart though 8-))
Yes, again the noise shows up as a different visual representation.

I'm definitely no expert on this, but if they can speed the process of bringing snicko up it would be a lot more accurate than Hot Spot is.
 

M0rphin3

International Debutant
benchmark00 is correct above. Refer to Bell at Sydney where it was obvious to all and sundry that he had whacked it, but Hot Spot showed nothing.
And another one when Azhar Ali nicked one off Jimmeh IIRC. He was given out and didn't even bother to refer it.
 

GIMH

Norwood's on Fire
Firstly, thanks captain obvious re: snicko. If you had read my earlier posts on this topic you will note that I said spend money on getting it up to speed.

Secondly, my point about the white spot is that where did the white spot come from? It wasn't the pad and it wasn't the ball. So one day that will result in an incorrect decision. If they're going to use the technology they have to trust it. If they trusted it they would've given Pietersen out. The fact is that it can't be trusted and it's a rubbish piece of technology for this application.
Wasn't it his bat hitting pad/ground? Can't remember for sure.

They should put microchips in the ball to stop all these arguments IMO
 

pup11

International Coach
Hot spot or no hot spot, I don't think there is any need of UDRS in LO cricket. If the recent Australia-England ODI series is anything to go by then its pretty obvious that the UDRS not only is time consuming but it also kills the momentum of the game and then Paine's dismissal from the last ODI is also something that has left me questioning the credibility of the hawk-eye and the UDRS.
 

Top