***Official*** DRS discussion thread

[Bun]

Dar, Taufel > Hawkeye operator bumbling on TV

Sri Lanka v Australia, 1st Test, Galle: Umpires ask ICC to look in to Hughes' dismissal | Cricket News | Sri Lanka v Australia | ESPN Cricinfo

In other words, Bravo BCCI, Bravo CEVNO.

 

[Spikey]

nah ****

 

[OMM!]

Hawkeye, or whatever ball tracking system is being used in this series, only works up to the point it hits something. I'd suggest it messed up because Hughes got a little touch on the ball with his bat. Therefore as it hit the bat on the full, Hawkeye immediately views it as if it was going straight on.

Now I haven't seen the live footage, so this may be total ball-larks and pure guessing. But watching the replays, that's what it looked like to me. But either way, he was not out!

 

[four_or_six]

Decision Review System: 'Independent software can evaluate ball-tracking,' says Hawk-Eye chief | Cricket News | Global | ESPN Cricinfo

Some sensible suggestions from the makers of Hawkeye. No doubt they won't happen.

 

[Cevno]

Decision Review System: 'Independent software can evaluate ball-tracking,' says Hawk-Eye chief | Cricket News | Global | ESPN Cricinfo

Some sensible suggestions from the makers of Hawkeye. No doubt they won't happen.

So he is suggesting that ICC develop a less innacurate system itself to track errors of what he says more accurate systems and fine them if it shows something wrong?
That's odd or is he talking about suspicions that the operators could rig the technology as required and about the Human element.

Comes back to the point that was raised at the time of the ICC decision that the 2 operators,specially Hawkeye want the contracts structured in such a way that would not allow ICC or the Anti corruption unit to keep a check on them after a certain point and would allow them to operate in secrecy after that point.

 

[Cevno]

Btw, should look into the one earlier today too. There have been quite a few instances in the past too which have gone unraised like this, so nice that they are openly looking into it now.

 

[marc71178]

Of course this problem here may not have anything to do with the technology being used not being the fully standard one would it?

 

[Vijay.Sharma]

While I think UDRS can definitely help in making decisions better, I am very sure it's implementation is totally effed up. The procedures need changing, for ex - remove the limit of unsuccessful appeals. In fact do away with appeals by allowing the third ump or the on-field umps to invoke technology in case of doubt.

Let the 3 umps work as a team and it will give us better results than it is doing now

 

[Bun]

Yep Cevno 1 - UDRS fanboys 0

 

[marc71178]

Choosing to ignore the facts again Bun, so out of character for you!

 

[honestbharani]

Of course this problem here may not have anything to do with the technology being used not being the fully standard one would it?

how does that mean anything? Given the state of finances of most boards, do you seriously expect everyone to have state of the art coverage? The point here is that if the technology is so dependant on the quality of cameras being the same everywhere, then it is just that much more difficult to accept it as any kind of solution and we are back to having DRS in some matches and no DRS in some...

 

[Bun]

UDRS is a luxury.

 

[Vijay.Sharma]

I was reading an article on cricinfo and it's so ironic to see some of the folks (seemed like non Indians from their usernames) arguing against UDRS. When the BCCI raised legitimate doubts it was all about money power, bullying, etc, etc. But now all their arguments seem legitimate

 

[Sanz]

Of course this problem here may not have anything to do with the technology being used not being the fully standard one would it?

The Batsman was out or not ?

 

[Spark]

Originally given out.

---

It's worth noting that even in this match we've had two clearly wrong decisions (both involving Clarke) overturned.

 

[Prince EWS]

Originally given out.

---

It's worth noting that even in this match we've had two clearly wrong decisions (both involving Clarke) overturned.

Yep. And zero correct decisions wrongfully changed.

What a terrible blight on the game.

 

[benchmark00]

Yep. And zero correct decisions wrongfully changed.

What a terrible blight on the game.

What would have happened if the Prince was originally given not out?

 

[sumantra]

Third Umpires Making Mockery of Technology Themselves

Twice it happened now, almost in back to back matches that rahul dravid was given not out by the on field umpire, then due to the appeal by the english team it went to the third umpire...and the HOT SPOT showed nothing, absolutely nothing...but the third umpires gave it out! i mean in order to overrule the decision made by the on field umpires, one has to be 100% sure, it has to be conclusive...there was no way one can give those out from whatever is seen in those replays...by doing that, i think, these umpires are themselves showing no respect for the technology, they are ruling it out...when i heard before the series that indian team is not willing to take the help of Hawk Eye in the series against england, i thought they were trying to stop time and something like that, but now i think they were right, they should not have agreed to the HOT SPOT either...what do u think?

 

[marc71178]

It was ironic they agreed to something that is less accurate than the Hawkeye they object so vociferously against, but you are ignoring the fact that the 3rd umpire has the enhanced sound, and heard the nick today, hence he was 100% sure and it was a correct decision.

 

[social]

It was ironic they agreed to something that is less accurate than the Hawkeye they object so vociferously against, but you are ignoring the fact that the 3rd umpire has the enhanced sound, and heard the nick today, hence he was 100% sure and it was a correct decision.

3rd umpire also said there was a deviation

Mustve had enhanced vision as well

As David Gower correctly said "flimsy evidence at best"