Jump to content

The Cricket Thread


McFaul
 Share

Do you like cricket?  

105 members have voted

You do not have permission to vote in this poll, or see the poll results. Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

Recommended Posts

It's about time the changed the review process so you don't lose an appeal when it's umpire's call.

Aye, I would agree with that. I think a few pundits (like Vaughan) have been saying it for a while. Seems very unfair at times

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Aye, I would agree with that. I think a few pundits (like Vaughan) have been saying it for a while. Seems very unfair at times

Stokes appeal against Amla earlier was a perfect example. Hawkeye was showing a fair chunk of it hitting the stumps but we lose an appeal because the umpire didn't give it. I'm all for not allowing frivilous appeals every other over but when it's that close you shouldn't be penalised. Pretty sure Bumble is another advocate of this.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Changed about 3 years ago iirc. DRS is a relatively recent concept anyway

 

about 7 or 8 years old now. i think reviews being reset after an innings came in in 2014.

 

agree about the flaws. silly that an umpire's pride seems to be the most important thing. stoke's had a perfectly good shout turned down earlier, which would have been sustained had the umpire given it out and SA reviewed it. it's all a bit silly. i think if the technology says it's hitting the stumps, give him out, otherwise why use it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

about 7 or 8 years old now. i think reviews being reset after an innings came in in 2014.

 

agree about the flaws. silly that an umpire's pride seems to be the most important thing. stoke's had a perfectly good shout turned down earlier, which would have been sustained had the umpire given it out and SA reviewed it. it's all a bit silly. i think if the technology says it's hitting the stumps, give him out, otherwise why use it?

There's a margin of error in the technology being used so it makes perfect sense to side with the umpire if it's a marginal call. It's predicting where the ball would've gone so it's not like goal line technology which is demonstrating where it did go. The umpire's pride doesn't come into it as far as I can see. The biggest 'flaw', if you like, is that it's only used if both countries agree upon it, because the ICC is in India's pocket.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's a margin of error in the technology being used so it makes perfect sense to side with the umpire if it's a marginal call. It's predicting where the ball would've gone so it's not like goal line technology which is demonstrating where it did go. The umpire's pride doesn't come into it as far as I can see. The biggest 'flaw', if you like, is that it's only used if both countries agree upon it, because the ICC is in India's pocket.

 

if it had only just clipping the stumps, i could understand it, but stoke's call looked a fair one to me. it was hitting the top of middle and the bails, according to DRS. is the margin of error that big? i dunno, i just know i'd be gutted if i bowled that delivery and it was turned down on review, just as i'd consider myself lucky if i was batting and got away with it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

if it had only just clipping the stumps, i could understand it, but stoke's call looked a fair one to me. it was hitting the top of middle and the bails, according to DRS. is the margin of error that big? i dunno, i just know i'd be gutted if i bowled that delivery and it was turned down on review, just as i'd consider myself lucky if i was batting and got away with it.

Well they use half a ball I believe which is probably a generous margin of error given the technology is constantly improving and so on but you have to have a standard and I also the players, officials etc. need to have confidence in it. I think it's generally accepted it's more accurate than that margin of error though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting chat on TMS about whether Anderson should always get the new ball. If it's a quick, bouncy pitch but there's not much movement through the air, would we better off giving it to Finn and Broad instead of always going for Anderson on reputation?

 

I think it's got to be horses for courses. When it's swinging, there's no one in the world better than Anderson at what he does and obviously you want him spearheading the attack. But when it isn't he can look ineffective and in those circumstances he could be brought out of the attack early so he's fresh for a charge with the older ball. He's developed brilliant abilities to reverse swing the old ball. It's hard to envisage him ever coming in at first or second change though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well they use half a ball I believe which is probably a generous margin of error given the technology is constantly improving and so on but you have to have a standard and I also the players, officials etc. need to have confidence in it. I think it's generally accepted it's more accurate than that margin of error though.

It's different to the use of Hawkeye in other sports because of its predictive nature, right? It's a shame there isn't more confidence in the technology. The one that stokes had turned down yesterday just looked out live and on DRS. I agree that it silly for a side to lose a review when it's umpire's call as well. A team shouldn't be penalised for asking a question on a marginal decision.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.