***Official*** DRS discussion thread

[Turbinator]

Tbh GIMH, you are overreacting here. Worried about you bud.

 

[GotSpin]

Get stuck in turbs.

This sub forum has been far too civil

 

[Bun]

Tbh GIMH, you are overreacting here. Worried about you bud.

awta

 

[ankitj]

Another rubbish masquerading as an article

2011 India Tour of England: Time for India to Adopt UDRS or Get Banished | Bleacher Report



Heights of incredulity.. stone age? India and BCCI?? Comparing to apartheid era banishment of SA????

Haven't read the whole article but reading those excerpts, I think this article would be a good entry in Cricinfo's Page 2 section.

 

[silentstriker]

Decision Review System: DRS technology expensive, unreliable - Niranjan Shah | India Cricket News | ESPN Cricinfo

BCCI are clearly looking out for the best financial interests of the ECB and other member boards.

 

[Jacknife]

Decision Review System: DRS technology expensive, unreliable - Niranjan Shah | India Cricket News | ESPN Cricinfo

BCCI are clearly looking out for the best financial interests of the ECB and other member boards.

SKY pay for it in England I believe, as they always have the technology on TV, whether it's been used or not, so they don't need to worry. It has got to be the ICC that pays for the technology, especially for the smaller boards, to make it uniform around the world.

 

[Cevno]

How about just use slow motion replays for a start for the really obvious decisions then?
Every broadcaster has that facility available atleast. So no extra costs.

And it's accuracy is not in question like the Hawkeye too.

 

[Jacknife]

How about just use slow motion replays for a start for the really obvious decisions then?
Every broadcaster has that facility available atleast. So no extra costs.

And it's accuracy is not in question like the Hawkeye too.

For what, edges, Lbw's, I can't see how using slow-mo will sort anything out and how the URDS is being used, isn't about the obvious decisions, it's the marginal calls. I just don't think you can go for half measures, especially in this day and age, where most people want near perfection in the decisions.

 

[Daemon]

Slow motion will help to resolve all the shockers imo. Restrict it to 1 review per innings and it won't even be abused for marginal decisions.

 

[Cevno]

The original purpose of the UDRS was to remove all the shockers .
Slow motion replays alone would remove most of that (like at Sydney) and fit in whatever silly objections BCCI have too.

It's not like the Hawkeye is 100% accurate on all calls as it has shown some weird things in the past like the ball bouncing over the stumps on a very low bouncing wickets.
Would probably be better to have it but not use it for marginal decisions ,but if it is causing a delay in full implementation then sod it. Marginal decisions can be left to the umpire in anycase.
As it is Hawkeye only overturns a low percentage of Marginal decisions.

 

[Jarquis]

Yeah, let's us slow-mo replays that have to be interpreted by a 3rd umpire, who is just as fallible as the umpires making the decisions on the ground to making mistakes rather than using a piece of technology that is irrefutably more accurate than the human eye. Great idea. ****ing dolts.

 

[Turbinator]

Yeah, let's us slow-mo replays that have to be interpreted by a 3rd umpire, who is just as fallible as the umpires making the decisions on the ground to making mistakes rather than using a piece of technology that is irrefutably more accurate than the human eye. Great idea. ****ing dolts.

Oh yeah because umpires chillin' on comfortable chairs, sippin' on Pina Colada in nice luxurious air conditioned rooms with the luxury of numerous slow motion replays and various angles are just as fallible as umpires standing for hours in damp, muggy, hot weather making quick decisions in real time in pressure situations with crowd noise constantly attacking their eardrums. Great logic. Marcuss.

 

[Cruxdude]

I am totally against using only slo-mo. It will only lead to incidents where the third umpire ****s up (like it happened in the Sydney test) and the whole thing blows up.

Also find BCCI talking about the welfare of smaller boards funny TSTL. ICC should pay up for the whole thing and BCCI should take the word of people who know better.

Also against using UDRS without Hotspot. It can potentially lead up to stand-offs when one team gets multiple calls turned down due to inadequate technology.

 

[Turbinator]

I am totally against using only slo-mo. It will only lead to incidents where the third umpire ****s up (like it happened in the Sydney test) and the whole thing blows up.

Also find BCCI talking about the welfare of smaller boards funny TSTL. ICC should pay up for the whole thing and BCCI should take the word of people who know better.

Also against using UDRS without Hotspot. It can potentially lead up to stand-offs when one team gets multiple calls turned down due to inadequate technology.

Awta.

Haven't spoken out, on this issue, on the forum till now. But I certainly support the use of UDRS, and hope it is implemented universally soon enough.

 

[Howe_zat]

Oh yeah because umpires chillin' on comfortable chairs, sippin' on Pina Colada in nice luxurious air conditioned rooms with the luxury of numerous slow motion replays and various angles are just as fallible as umpires standing for hours in damp, muggy, hot weather making quick decisions in real time in pressure situations with crowd noise constantly attacking their eardrums. Great logic. Marcuss.

Propose that Turbinator is to make all his posts in rap-battle format from now on.

 

[Cevno]

Yeah, let's us slow-mo replays that have to be interpreted by a 3rd umpire, who is just as fallible as the umpires making the decisions on the ground to making mistakes rather than using a piece of technology that is irrefutably more accurate than the human eye. Great idea. ****ing dolts.

Only with regards to absolute shockers tbh.

These are the decisions that most need to be changed. Even with the Hawk eye these clangers are judged by the third umpire under the UDRS .
Don't obviously want third umpires judging marginal LBW's.

So according to you the third umpires should not at all judge whether the evidence is conclusive or not even if full system is impemented?

 

[Turbinator]

Propose that Turbinator is to make all his posts in rap-battle format from now on.

 

[Cevno]

I am totally against using only slo-mo. It will only lead to incidents where the third umpire ****s up (like it happened in the Sydney test) and the whole thing blows up.

Not defending the BCCI ,but what is wrong with implementing a part of the full UDRS for the time being?

SInce you are not wanting hotspot ,it only really leaves the Hawkeye which won't get implemented.
Even if it is used it won't be judging stumpings like in Sydney ,so don't know where that argument is coming from?

Third umpires using slow motions will only be doing the part of the UDRS except Hawkeye which they are in any case supposed to do under the system and atleast removing the major shockers.
It is the third umpires job in any case under any system to determine whether the proof is conclusive or not ,is it not? Or do you want robots now?

 

[Cruxdude]

Not defending the BCCI ,but what is wrong with implementing a part of the full UDRS for the time being?

SInce you are not wanting hotspot ,it only really leaves the Hawkeye which won't get implemented.
Even if it is used it won't be judging stumpings like in Sydney ,so don't know where that argument is coming from?

Third umpires using slow motions will only be doing the part of the UDRS except Hawkeye which they are in any case supposed to do under the system and atleast removing the major shockers.
It is the third umpires job in any case under any system to determine whether the proof is conclusive or not ,is it not? Or do you want robots now?

Naah. I am not against Hotspot. I don't want UDRS without hotspot.

 

[Cruxdude]

Not defending the BCCI ,but what is wrong with implementing a part of the full UDRS for the time being?

SInce you are not wanting hotspot ,it only really leaves the Hawkeye which won't get implemented.
Even if it is used it won't be judging stumpings like in Sydney ,so don't know where that argument is coming from?

Third umpires using slow motions will only be doing the part of the UDRS except Hawkeye which they are in any case supposed to do under the system and atleast removing the major shockers.
It is the third umpires job in any case under any system to determine whether the proof is conclusive or not ,is it not? Or do you want robots now?

Also, just using that stumping as an example. It is easy for the third umpire to have a view contrary to that of the general public with only slow-mo. A couple of close caught behinds not given for a team will only increase tensions.

Use the whole thing or don't use it at all.