***Official*** DRS discussion thread

[Cevno]

Yes, deliveries often do surprising things.

This worries you?

Yeah it worries me if on a pitch where all the balls are hardly bouncing knee length one ball which hits the pad fullish is shown to be going over the stumps.
Or one ball which hits the pad below the knee roll is shown to be clipping the bails.

Or when a googly off the hand coming in with the angle which was spinning into the batsman ,is shown on the tracks to straighten for no apparent reason.

Or a ball which hits the stumps actually is shown to be missing it (or was it the other way round)?

 

[Cevno]

They will come around to it eventually.

Does this mean LBWs cannot be challenged in the upcoming series?

I guess they could if there is a inside edge or not given due to a inside edge etc...

Or if the ball is clearly pitching way outside leg and given etc...

 

[Cevno]

Lbw''s where the batsmen has hit the ball can be reviewed rt ?

Would be stupid if they are not.

 

[Howe_zat]

You're exaggerating. There is always a degree of variable bounce and turn. Find me a specific example if you can, but I've never seen there there being absolutely no variation and then Hawkeye saying there is.

 

[Spikey]

"The leg-before decision for that series will be completely that of the on-field umpire," BCCI president Shashank Manohar said.

India,

 

[four_or_six]

Definitely something's better than nothing.

A bit weird though, hawkeye has been one of the better parts, hot spot seems to have caused more controversies. A bit ludicrous if a review can show the ball clearly going over, and the batsman is still given out.

 

[GIMH]

Yeah, in conclusion:

1. Good that we will have some reviews
2. BCCI are still **** ****s
3. I still hope Tendy is given out wrongly on 99, lbw

 

[Cevno]

You're exaggerating. There is always a degree of variable bounce and turn. Find me a specific example if you can, but I've never seen there there being absolutely no variation and then Hawkeye saying there is.

TO QUOTE Buegey's older post -

Shane Warne bowled Andrew Strauss with a ball in 2005 which Hawkeye showed missing the stumps.

Everyone was shocked, not least the bails, which were laying on the ground.

The video seems to have been taken down.


Also tbh ,the Sachin LBW in the world cup semi's against pakistan was probably marginal too.

Don't really have a log ,but i think there were a couple of tracks in the recent INDA-WI series too and i may have mentioned them.

Though,having said that Hawkeye has it benefits too and needs to be used in the long run,but a system needs to me decided first that how these errors can be dealt with.

 

[vcs]

What happened to the minnows qualifying for the 2015 WC thing.. I thought they were supposed to discuss that as well in the ICC meeting.. IMHO a much more important issue than the UDRS debate (please don't take offense GIMH ).

 

[Cevno]

AWTA.

Nothing seems to have come out in regards to that at the moment,though.

 

[four_or_six]

Yeah, in conclusion:

1. Good that we will have some reviews
2. BCCI are still **** ****s
3. I still hope Tendy is given out wrongly on 99, at Lord's, lbw

Corrected

 

[GIMH]

What happened to the minnows qualifying for the 2015 WC thing.. I thought they were supposed to discuss that as well in the ICC meeting.. IMHO a much more important issue than the UDRS debate (please don't take offense GIMH ).

I agree...or at least as important, anyway

No use spreading the game if people are going to be put off by injustice...but the 2015 WC stinks of injustice. Both need resolving.

 

[Stapel]

From cricinfo:

This means that India will, for the first time since 2008, be agreeable to using the DRS in a bilateral series when it tours England from July onwards.

However the DRS used in the England-India series will be without the Hawk-Eye ball-tracker which means line decisions for lbw appeals cannot be referred. For example, if the ball pitches outside leg stump and the batsman is given out lbw, the lack of ball-tracking technology means he cannot question the decision. On the other hand, if a batsman is given out lbw and he thinks there is an inside-edge involved, he can get the decision reviewed since Hot Spot can resolve whether there is an edge.

I can understand why some people are sceptical towards the Hawk-Eye ball tracker. But a ball pitching outside leg, has nothing to do with ball tracking. You don't even need Haw-Eye, just a TV-rerun should be enough! The only dubious thing about Hawk-Eye, is its ball track predicition, after the ball has pitched....

 

[Howe_zat]

TO QUOTE Buegey's older post -



The video seems to have been taken down.


Also tbh ,the Sachin LBW in the world cup semi's against pakistan was probably marginal too.

Don't really have a log ,but i think there were a couple of tracks in the recent INDA-WI series too and i may have mentioned them.

Though,having said that Hawkeye has it benefits too and needs to be used in the long run,but a system needs to me decided first that how these errors can be dealt with.

The Tendulkar lbw shout was one of the many, many pieces of data the Hawkeye manufactures have released in order to be verified. It's your problem if you choose not to read these things and then assume they're dodgy.

As for the current India-WI series, how did you not see the variable bounce on that pitch? Once again you're either massively exaggerating or your evidence that Hawkeye in its current incarnation is wrong because you say so.

I haven't seen the Warne 2005 one, but I doubt it's controversial to think that the system has been improved since then.

 

[Spark]

Bizarre that pitching outside leg calls can't be reviewed, but it's a start.

 

[biased indian]

I agree...or at least as important, anyway

No use spreading the game if people are going to be put off by injustice...but the 2015 WC stinks of injustice. Both need resolving.

i think it will be discussed tomorrow..its not a one day meeting rt ?

 

[Cevno]

From cricinfo:



I can understand why some people are sceptical towards the Hawk-Eye ball tracker. But a ball pitching outside leg, has nothing to do with ball tracking. You don't even need Haw-Eye, just a TV-rerun should be enough! The only dubious thing about Hawk-Eye, is its ball track predicition, after the ball has pitched....

Yeah ,i agree.

A clear ball pitching outside leg has to be reviewed hawkeye or not. Atleast a pitch map can be used.

 

[Cevno]

The Tendulkar lbw shout was one of the many, many pieces of data the Hawkeye manufactures have released in order to be verified. It's your problem if you choose not to read these things and then assume they're dodgy.

As for the current India-WI series, how did you not see the variable bounce on that pitch? Once again you're either massively exaggerating or your evidence that Hawkeye in its current incarnation is wrong because you say so.

I haven't seen the Warne 2005 one, but I doubt it's controversial to think that the system has been improved since then.

What data was released? From what i can gather it still did not make the output certain.

And It's not only me though, other people have mentioned it too and so have the commentators and the players have looked shocked too.


Hawkeye has many times shown paths which according to human comprehension are strange to say the least.
As i said there have been many other instances too.

 

[Jarquis]

Pretty sure Cevno is for the UDRS too.

Made enough posts against Hawkeye for me to think otherwise tbph.

 

[Cevno]

Made enough posts against Hawkeye for me to think otherwise tbph.

Hawkeye not = UDRS though.

And even if it was i am not completely anti - Hawkeye.
Refer to the thread in CC for my complete view on the system.