-
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.
***Official*** DRS discussion thread
- Thread starter morgieb
- Start date
Fusion
Global Moderator
f_o_s has already addressed this issue in her post below, so let's just all try to stay on topic and move on please.
biased indian
International Coach
YouTube - Michael Holding on India, the DRS and leaving the ICC Cricket Committee - 2011 Cowdrey Lecture
I completely agree to what holding is saying untill Brazill came into it.....and most of us who oppose DRS is arguing about the same
he just forgot that the difference between indian and brazil is that though brazil was the best team in the world at that time the money was in europe. and they dictated FIFA
I completely agree to what holding is saying untill Brazill came into it.....and most of us who oppose DRS is arguing about the same
he just forgot that the difference between indian and brazil is that though brazil was the best team in the world at that time the money was in europe. and they dictated FIFA
As far as I'm concerned, if it improves the accuracy of decisions by any amount, no matter how miniscule, ball tracking technology should be used, and should be mandatory.
I don't know the exact stats, but IIRC the technology does tend to reduce mistakes and improve the accuracy of decisions. By that process, I feel it should be used (providing the stats are backing me up here, its 11:30 and I really can't be bothered looking for them).
I don't know the exact stats, but IIRC the technology does tend to reduce mistakes and improve the accuracy of decisions. By that process, I feel it should be used (providing the stats are backing me up here, its 11:30 and I really can't be bothered looking for them).
Cevno
Hall of Fame Member
Former West Indies fast bowler and noted commentator Michael Holding has backed the use of technology in umpiring decisions, though he believes ball-tracking should be done away with since it is inaccurate. During last week's annual conference, the ICC - following the BCCI's sustained opposition to ball-tracking - decided to do away with it as one of the compulsory technological aids for decision-making, while making the DRS mandatory in ODIs and Tests.
"I have never been a fan of the projected path of the ball," Holding said during a round-table discussion at the MCC Spirit of Cricket lecture. "What HawkEye has produced with regards to the actual path of ball, where the ball has landed and where it has gone on to hit whatever - the bat or the pad - I am 100% happy with that.
"The projected path of the ball [though] is a calculation. Obviously it has a margin of error, [but] they won't call it that since they don't want to hear the word 'error'. That's why whenever it is hitting the stumps or projected to be hitting the stumps, they leave it to the umpire's call. If you are leaving it to the umpire's call, that means you are thinking whatever you are showing is not 100% correct … So everything except the projected path I am happy with."
While paring down the DRS, the ICC also rejected the visual aid provided by the pitch mat, again on the BCCI's insistence, a move that Holding criticised. "That mat is placed there by an immovable camera," he said. "[It shows] where the ball is being pitched, and that has been shown to be 100% correct, so I have no problems with that. I don't see why India don't want to use it."
Decision Review System: Michael Holding not a fan of ball-tracking technology | Cricket News | Global | ESPN Cricinfo
Mostly agree what Holding is saying in the above including about the Pitch map. Nice to see all arguments now coming out about the predictive path.
"I have never been a fan of the projected path of the ball," Holding said during a round-table discussion at the MCC Spirit of Cricket lecture. "What HawkEye has produced with regards to the actual path of ball, where the ball has landed and where it has gone on to hit whatever - the bat or the pad - I am 100% happy with that.
"The projected path of the ball [though] is a calculation. Obviously it has a margin of error, [but] they won't call it that since they don't want to hear the word 'error'. That's why whenever it is hitting the stumps or projected to be hitting the stumps, they leave it to the umpire's call. If you are leaving it to the umpire's call, that means you are thinking whatever you are showing is not 100% correct … So everything except the projected path I am happy with."
While paring down the DRS, the ICC also rejected the visual aid provided by the pitch mat, again on the BCCI's insistence, a move that Holding criticised. "That mat is placed there by an immovable camera," he said. "[It shows] where the ball is being pitched, and that has been shown to be 100% correct, so I have no problems with that. I don't see why India don't want to use it."
Decision Review System: Michael Holding not a fan of ball-tracking technology | Cricket News | Global | ESPN Cricinfo
Mostly agree what Holding is saying in the above including about the Pitch map. Nice to see all arguments now coming out about the predictive path.
Last edited:
Jacknife
International Captain
Didn't you just call do exactly that here:gimh
why the ridicule of people disagreeing with u?
people disagree with me left right n center every hour here, doesn.t mean I can go around calling all them retards, clowns, fangirls, broadys etc.
as voltaire said, i'may disagree with u, but i'll die to ensure u get to voice it.
PhoenixFire
International Coach
Let's Cevno more accusations please Corrin.
You've got to say that one out loud for it work.
You've got to say that one out loud for it work.
Bun
Banned
am sorry.
Borges
International Regular
Oh Bun! You are a refreshing departure from the other posters on this thread who have reacted abominably when they were exposed by their own past posts. Respect you for that. Very much.
Sehwag, yesterday: "I'm a big fan of it (UDRS). Even the Hawk-Eye is a good tool." As always, uninhibited in saying what he believes in. Respect him too, for that.
Debris
International 12th Man
This would seem to be the "argument for perfection" logical fallacy which goes something like "It is not perfect, therefore it is useless" ignoring the middle ground where there are occasions where it is useful and other occasions where it is not.
The software for the predictive path already takes that margin for error into account so you get the ones nicking the stumps left to umpires call. As far as I can work out, they are 100% confident about the ones where the umpire is overruled. It may not be hitting exactly where they show it on the graphic but they are 100% sure it is hitting (or missing) the stumps. Why not use the technology when it is useful and ignore it when it is not?
indiaholic
International Captain
GIMH
Norwood's on Fire
Lol
Cevno
Hall of Fame Member
He is right compared to some others.^^^^^^^
four_or_six
Cricketer Of The Year
Cut it out guys. Just discuss the topic without sniping at each other.
Cevno
Hall of Fame Member
Agreed . Try to avoid it as much as possible, though it becomes really tough to not respond sometimes when one side is continuously engaging in it as much as you try to ignore it. And Mods usually only react after their has been a response to the first snipe ,not before it.
First of all something needs to be done about this new nonsense that has started about accusing every Indian member of being a Bun /Precam or whatever Multi in every thread.
First of all something needs to be done about this new nonsense that has started about accusing every Indian member of being a Bun /Precam or whatever Multi in every thread.