The Cricket Thread (...and other sport)
Jul 11th 2013, 8:37 am
#2836
I'm Old Gregg!
Joined: Mar 2009
Location: A Former Bogan Colony in QLD
Posts: 8,460
Re: The Cricket Thread (...and other sport)
Well useless third umpire Erasmus manages to cost England twice in the day.
That Trott dismissal was bull! The on-field umpire gives it not out. Which means the review system has to CONCLUSIVELY prove otherwise. Hotspot showed nothing, but that is not unusual. However slow mo replays show the ball deviating into the pads as it goes past the bat. How he has been able to conclusively state that he has NOT hit that it beyond me. YET he was obviously able to conclusively see that Agar's foot was behind the line when no one else could.
So far, he has cost England a +90 aggregate on the first innings as well as a second innings wicket.
That Trott dismissal was bull! The on-field umpire gives it not out. Which means the review system has to CONCLUSIVELY prove otherwise. Hotspot showed nothing, but that is not unusual. However slow mo replays show the ball deviating into the pads as it goes past the bat. How he has been able to conclusively state that he has NOT hit that it beyond me. YET he was obviously able to conclusively see that Agar's foot was behind the line when no one else could.
So far, he has cost England a +90 aggregate on the first innings as well as a second innings wicket.
Jul 11th 2013, 9:48 am
#2837
Home and Happy
Joined: Dec 2002
Location: Keep true friends and puppets close, trust no-one else...
Posts: 93,859
Re: The Cricket Thread (...and other sport)
Well useless third umpire Erasmus manages to cost England twice in the day.
That Trott dismissal was bull! The on-field umpire gives it not out. Which means the review system has to CONCLUSIVELY prove otherwise. Hotspot showed nothing, but that is not unusual. However slow mo replays show the ball deviating into the pads as it goes past the bat. How he has been able to conclusively state that he has NOT hit that it beyond me. YET he was obviously able to conclusively see that Agar's foot was behind the line when no one else could.
So far, he has cost England a +90 aggregate on the first innings as well as a second innings wicket.
That Trott dismissal was bull! The on-field umpire gives it not out. Which means the review system has to CONCLUSIVELY prove otherwise. Hotspot showed nothing, but that is not unusual. However slow mo replays show the ball deviating into the pads as it goes past the bat. How he has been able to conclusively state that he has NOT hit that it beyond me. YET he was obviously able to conclusively see that Agar's foot was behind the line when no one else could.
So far, he has cost England a +90 aggregate on the first innings as well as a second innings wicket.
Jul 11th 2013, 2:43 pm
#2838
Mostly Harmless
Joined: Dec 2009
Location: Semi-rural wonderworld, Brisbane
Posts: 15,109
Re: The Cricket Thread (...and other sport)
Yeh, a couple of dodgy decisions but the good guys will prevail, keep the faith 
Jul 11th 2013, 3:25 pm
#2839
Proudly Deplorable
Joined: May 2003
Location: Alloha snack bar
Posts: 24,246
Re: The Cricket Thread (...and other sport)
Well useless third umpire Erasmus manages to cost England twice in the day.
That Trott dismissal was bull! The on-field umpire gives it not out. Which means the review system has to CONCLUSIVELY prove otherwise. Hotspot showed nothing, but that is not unusual. However slow mo replays show the ball deviating into the pads as it goes past the bat. How he has been able to conclusively state that he has NOT hit that it beyond me. YET he was obviously able to conclusively see that Agar's foot was behind the line when no one else could.
So far, he has cost England a +90 aggregate on the first innings as well as a second innings wicket.
That Trott dismissal was bull! The on-field umpire gives it not out. Which means the review system has to CONCLUSIVELY prove otherwise. Hotspot showed nothing, but that is not unusual. However slow mo replays show the ball deviating into the pads as it goes past the bat. How he has been able to conclusively state that he has NOT hit that it beyond me. YET he was obviously able to conclusively see that Agar's foot was behind the line when no one else could.
So far, he has cost England a +90 aggregate on the first innings as well as a second innings wicket.
DRS works if the rules are followed. Maybe India have a point
Jul 11th 2013, 4:32 pm
#2840
I'm Old Gregg!
Joined: Mar 2009
Location: A Former Bogan Colony in QLD
Posts: 8,460
Re: The Cricket Thread (...and other sport)
We have seen countless examples of hotspot not showing a mark when a player has clearly got a good edge on the ball. Hawk eye is expected to deliberate on LBW decisions where the margins are in millimetres, yet it has a margin of error of centimetres. Umpires never take this into account, they simply take a robotic response to "what DRS says goes". If they learned to use their judgement a little more then the likes of the Trott dismissal would never happen.
DRS was brought in to eliminate the shockers from the game. Yesterday, an on field umpire made a brave and very correct decision, only for a blind tosser in an office using flawed technology to over-rule it and produce a shocker.
Jul 11th 2013, 9:07 pm
#2841
Lost in BE Cyberspace
Joined: Jan 2009
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 20,821
Re: The Cricket Thread (...and other sport)
I've always been of the view that I do not agree with DRS, not because of the technology itself, but the human interpretation of it. The technology is clearly flawed, in that it is not 100% correct. That I do not have a problem with. My problem is that the idiot umpires who interpret the DRS findings do not take this into consideration.
We have seen countless examples of hotspot not showing a mark when a player has clearly got a good edge on the ball. Hawk eye is expected to deliberate on LBW decisions where the margins are in millimetres, yet it has a margin of error of centimetres. Umpires never take this into account, they simply take a robotic response to "what DRS says goes". If they learned to use their judgement a little more then the likes of the Trott dismissal would never happen.
DRS was brought in to eliminate the shockers from the game. Yesterday, an on field umpire made a brave and very correct decision, only for a blind tosser in an office using flawed technology to over-rule it and produce a shocker.
We have seen countless examples of hotspot not showing a mark when a player has clearly got a good edge on the ball. Hawk eye is expected to deliberate on LBW decisions where the margins are in millimetres, yet it has a margin of error of centimetres. Umpires never take this into account, they simply take a robotic response to "what DRS says goes". If they learned to use their judgement a little more then the likes of the Trott dismissal would never happen.
DRS was brought in to eliminate the shockers from the game. Yesterday, an on field umpire made a brave and very correct decision, only for a blind tosser in an office using flawed technology to over-rule it and produce a shocker.
Hopefully it will improve over time, which I'm sure it will.
Jul 11th 2013, 9:38 pm
#2842
snɐןɔ ʎʇıuɐs
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 6,558
Re: The Cricket Thread (...and other sport)
It's perfectly possible to track ball, bat and wickets with arbitrary accuracy throughout the strike. Just think how old Hawk Eye is, and where it came from originally...
And it's perfectly possible to deliver that to an earpiece on the hat of the ref, in real time.
No need to play silly games, the technology is quite up to replacing the ref in these matters.
And it's perfectly possible to deliver that to an earpiece on the hat of the ref, in real time.
No need to play silly games, the technology is quite up to replacing the ref in these matters.
Jul 11th 2013, 10:00 pm
#2843
Lost in BE Cyberspace
Joined: Jan 2009
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 20,821
Re: The Cricket Thread (...and other sport)
It's perfectly possible to track ball, bat and wickets with arbitrary accuracy throughout the strike. Just think how old Hawk Eye is, and where it came from originally...
And it's perfectly possible to deliver that to an earpiece on the hat of the ref, in real time.
No need to play silly games, the technology is quite up to replacing the ref in these matters.
And it's perfectly possible to deliver that to an earpiece on the hat of the ref, in real time.
No need to play silly games, the technology is quite up to replacing the ref in these matters.
Overall, I think it is a whole lot better than just an Ump making a decision on his own. Some mistakes will be made with all technology and interpretations, but overall it is a vast improvement. I'm all for it.
Jul 12th 2013, 12:45 am
#2844
Mostly Harmless
Joined: Dec 2009
Location: Semi-rural wonderworld, Brisbane
Posts: 15,109
Re: The Cricket Thread (...and other sport)
I reckon a lead of 200 will do it, Eng/Wales/SA leading by 93 with 6 wickets in hand right now ... Attritional cricket on a slow, low surface, good stuff, a proper contest.
Jul 12th 2013, 1:38 am
#2845
Home and Happy
Joined: Dec 2002
Location: Keep true friends and puppets close, trust no-one else...
Posts: 93,859
Re: The Cricket Thread (...and other sport)
Jul 12th 2013, 1:58 am
#2846
Lost in BE Cyberspace
Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 14,040
Re: The Cricket Thread (...and other sport)
Chasing 200 will be a challenge for oz. Pitch holding up will though. At 3pm were confident for that train to nottingham in the morning. 5 for 203. But hey this is the ashes. Still could be all over by stumps.
Jul 12th 2013, 8:55 am
#2847
Home and Happy
Joined: Dec 2002
Location: Keep true friends and puppets close, trust no-one else...
Posts: 93,859
Re: The Cricket Thread (...and other sport)
Having had to sleep through the last three hours of play it was a nice surprise to wake up this morning and find there will be action left to see tonight
Jul 12th 2013, 9:01 am
#2848
Mostly Harmless
Joined: Dec 2009
Location: Semi-rural wonderworld, Brisbane
Posts: 15,109
Re: The Cricket Thread (...and other sport)
Nice to see the umpiring howlers are evening up already ...
Jul 12th 2013, 9:13 am
#2849
Home and Happy
Joined: Dec 2002
Location: Keep true friends and puppets close, trust no-one else...
Posts: 93,859
Jul 12th 2013, 9:30 am
#2850
Account Closed
Joined: May 2013
Posts: 0
Re: The Cricket Thread (...and other sport)
Lots of controversy around Broad not walking when he was clearly out, but not so much surrounding Trott when he was clearly not out. What goes around comes around. May have to pull Trevor Chappell out of the bag if the Aussies go for the old spirit of the game whinge. Great game innit
