Umpiring Errors

[Cevno]

That Cook one was only clipping wasn't it?

Was hitting absolute middle of Leg, but had to be hitting some part of middle to be out.

 

[Cevno]

I'm struggling to work out what the use of the better quality mics is for if they're going to be ignored.

Because a few overs after that the ball passed Dravid's bat and there was a similar sound. But when it was replayed it was miles away from the bat.

See comments here -
http://www.cricketweb.net/forum/ind...-second-test-trent-bridge-91.html#post2618377

The hIgh quality microphones can pick up weird sounds sometimes. Sky conveniently did not show the Snicko on that one.

 

[Top_Cat]

Anyone remember England's tour of South Africa and England moaning about No Hotspot after Smith was given not out?

Seems they are developing a habit of calling for technology first and moaning when it allegedly screws them over. It seems they want the technology but favorable results too.




During South Africa tour ,the ECB head-


“It’s absurd without Hot Spot,” said Clarke on Saturday. “How on earth can you have a caught-behind overturned? Until the technology is applied correctly we are better off with the old system, because at least if the umpire is as deaf as a post and as blind as a bat it’s the same for both sides.”

Blame the BCCI.

The above is made redundant, though, by the fact that where the rubber meets the road, the ECB is officially for it.

 

[Cevno]

The above is made redundant, though, by the fact that where the rubber meets the road, the ECB is officially for it.

So what are they complaining about now?

They can't make technology to only show results they want. Either you want it or you do not. Can't call the system absurd without it and demand it and then moan about it too when it allegedly screws you over(which i don't think is clear at all, it did).

Also it wasn't only the BCCI that wanted Hotspot, but ECB wanted it equally desperately. In any case there is no clarity in this instance whether there was a edge or not(refer to Dravid incident for noise) and only really Laxman would know which is again ironic because people on here were claiming wrt the Morgan one in the previous test Technology > Player without Motive too.

 

[Top_Cat]

English people moaning about stuff is hardly new.

 

[Howe_zat]

Cevno, will you please stop this habit of yours where you assume every single person from one country acts in unison when it comes to these ideas, and that different reactions to different situations should be treated as hypocrisy.

The ECB want the UDRS with all the kit. That's their official position.

Giles Clarke is an oaf, and what he had to say about dodgy third umpires in South Africa two years ago is of little relevance.

Stuart Broad, who is actually a different person to Clarke, has now said:

"All of our players thought that was quite a clear edge and Hot Spot hasn't really shown up the faint edges which is a bit of a flaw I think," he said. "There was a question of what it hit and the answer wasn't what KP thought it was."

"I actually had a cheeky feel of his edge when the ball went past, but there's no vaseline or anything on there," he admitted. "I think it's just Hot Spot, we've found the really faint edges don't show up. It's just one of those things."

Hardly leading a revolt, is he?

He's called its accuracy on picking up faint edges into some question. He's not deriding it. He's just saying what a lot of us already think is the case, and hasn't actually called for any action to be taken.

 

[Cevno]

Cevno, will you please stop this habit of yours where you assume every single person from one country acts in unison when it comes to these ideas, and that different reactions to different situations should be treated as hypocrisy.

The ECB want the UDRS with all the kit. That's their official position.

Giles Clarke is an oaf, and what he had to say about dodgy third umpires in South Africa two years ago is of little relevance.

Stuart Broad, who is actually a different person to Clarke, has now said:



Hardly leading a revolt, is he?

He's called its accuracy on picking up faint edges into some question. He's not deriding it. He's just saying what a lot of us already think is the case, and hasn't actually called for any action to be taken.

Whether Giles Clarke is a Oaf or not is irrelevant as long as he is the ECB Head and represents the position of the board. Same with the Oafs who run the BCCI.. And he said it was absurd to have UDRS at the time without Hotspot. Andy Flower agreed with him too ftr.

Also when Broad comes to the press conference he is representing the English team, not himself ftr. If everyone does not share that view in the team then fair enough.

Cevno, will you please stop this habit of yours where you assume every single person from one country acts in unison when it comes to these ideas, and that different reactions to different situations should be treated as hypocrisy.

The ECB want the UDRS with all the kit. That's their official position.

Giles Clarke is an oaf, and what he had to say about dodgy third umpires in South Africa two years ago is of little relevance.

Hopefully then everyone keeps this mind in dealing with BCCI versus players comments too if are gonna draw that distinction.

Because in the other thread everyone is pretty happy to assume Sachin is the BCCI, while when Dhoni made that hotel comment many were jumping over bridges to point out BCCI's stance on UDRS which then was no UDRS at all mostly(and he wasn't even referring to DRS but just wrong decisions in general). And same applies to the now review it comments wrt every player when he gets a wrong decision. Works both ways..

 

[Howe_zat]

Whether Giles Clarke is a Oaf or not is irrelevant as long as he is the ECB Head and represents the position of the board. Same with the Oafs who run the BCCI.. And he said it was absurd to have UDRS at the time without Hotspot. Andy Flower agreed with him too ftr.

My point was less that he is the head of the ECB, more that he made that comment two years ago. In any case, his opinion has not changed, and still makes some sense. I think HotSpot often fails to pick up a faint edge, but eschewing it completely when it can help is not the answer.

Also when Broad comes to the press conference he is representing the English team, not himself ftr. If everyone does not share that view in the team then fair enough.

Broad is allowed an opinion.

Hopefully then everyone keeps this mind in dealing with BCCI versus players comments too if are gonna draw that distinction.

Because in the other thread everyone is pretty happy to assume Sachin is the BCCI, while when Dhoni made that hotel comment many were jumping over bridges to point out BCCI's stance on UDRS which then was no UDRS at all mostly. And same applies to the now review it comments wrt every player. Works both ways..

I agree.

 

[G.I.Joe]

Have heard some talk that supposedly players from a number of sides are using a very simple substance on the edges of their bat, because it doesn't show up on hot-spot if it is a smll nick. Cools the bat down enough to get away with it.

Wouldn't the edges of the bat then show up on hotspot as a temperature differential?

 

[G.I.Joe]

Cevno, will you please stop this habit of yours where you assume every single person from one country acts in unison when it comes to these ideas, and that different reactions to different situations should be treated as hypocrisy.

So, in the absence of definitive proof that a particular Indian player supports the BCCI stance on Hawkeye, he shall no longer be considered deserving of being on the wrong end of a wrong umpiring call that would have been over turned if Hawkeye were in operation.

 

[G.I.Joe]

As umpire Asad Rauf ruled in Laxman's favour, England skipper Andrew Strauss went for DRS but that too didn't favour the home side.

Kevin Pietersen and Laxman were seen getting into a bit of an argument and later Stuart Broad told media persons his side was convinced it was a nick.

"Players feel Hot-Spot sometimes doesn't show faint edges. It's a bit of a flaw," stated Broad.

But what kept the controversy lingering was the Vaughan tweet which virtually accused Laxman of wrong-doing since vaseline or any liquid on the bat don't show up on the Hot-Spot technology.

Broad actually went ahead and checked Laxman's bat if there was any vaseline or liquid applied to it.

"I had a cheeky feel of the edge of his bat as the ball went past him. There was no vaseline, no liquid there. It's just that Hot-Spot is not showing very faint edges," he said.

Vaseline stirs up a row at Trent Bridge - The Times of India

 

[Uppercut]

I think he means the reduced friction causes the spot where the ball nicks the bat to be a bit cooler.

 

[Howe_zat]

So, in the absence of definitive proof that a particular Indian player supports the BCCI stance on Hawkeye, he shall no longer be considered deserving of being on the wrong end of a wrong umpiring call that would have been over turned if Hawkeye were in operation.

Not me you should be telling, is it?

 

[GIMH]

Cevno using irrelevant points and zero logic on his crusade to prove the rest of the world as hypocrites? Hold the front page.

 

[G.I.Joe]

Not me you should be telling, is it?

Yeah, that's true, tbf. Didn't mean to suggest you indulged in such behaviour specifically.

 

[ankitj]

Wonder what effect use of vaseline will have on controlling the shots. Think it would make playing shots much harder.

 

[vic_orthdox]

So what are they complaining about now?

They can't make technology to only show results they want. Either you want it or you do not. Can't call the system absurd without it and demand it and then moan about it too when it allegedly screws you over(which i don't think is clear at all, it did).

Also it wasn't only the BCCI that wanted Hotspot, but ECB wanted it equally desperately. In any case there is no clarity in this instance whether there was a edge or not(refer to Dravid incident for noise) and only really Laxman would know which is again ironic because people on here were claiming wrt the Morgan one in the previous test Technology > Player without Motive too.

No-where did they say that they don't want it. They just don't think that the tool is perfectly accurate. It's another thing that should be used to help, but not the only thing that you rely on. You're arguing against a point that no-one's making; no-one wants Hotspot to be stricken from the system. Just because it has its flaws, doesn't mean that it can't help you a lot of the time make the right decision.

I think that anyone who watched the Ashes or has already seen a lot of hotspot could have told you that before the series.

 

[Top_Cat]

Can't think of a substance which would have the effect of cooling something as porous as wood down to undetectable level, especially with softer willow batters use these days.

 

[Furball]

3-2

Swann was absolutely plumb LBW to Harbhajan in the first test first innings and then Harbhajan LBW one here.
Also it wouldn't have been overturned but there was that stupid cook one in the first innings where you are not out if it hits 2.56m out but out if it hits 2.49m out of the crease.

No it wouldn't, half the ball was hitting leg which has always been 'umpire's call' for UDRS, Cook being 2.5m down the track has nothing to do with it.

 

[BoyBrumby]

It's 4-2 by my count on decision that would've been overturned by UDRS:

England:

1) Morgan given out caught behind without hitting it 1st innings, 1st test
2) Sachin plumb LBW 2nd innings, 1st test
3) Raina plumber LBW 2nd innings, 1st test
4) Cook given out LBW when ball was missing off, 1st innings, 2nd test

India:

1) Swann plumb LBW to Harbhajan, 1st innings, 1st test
2) Harbhajan edging into his pads, given out LBW, 1st innings, 2nd test

Any decision that shows up as "umpire's call" can't categorically be called an error nor can edges too fine to show up on Hotspot, hence the absence of the Laxman edge that snicko detected but Hotpsot didn't.