Furball
Evil Scotsman
What the **** are you dribbling about?More than 2.5 m from the wicket. Hawkeye stand snull as per it's developers and rules.
And even the developers admitted this is tough to simulate.
What the **** are you dribbling about?More than 2.5 m from the wicket. Hawkeye stand snull as per it's developers and rules.
And even the developers admitted this is tough to simulate.
It's hilarious indeedNew to Indian cricket I see.
It's just funny at this point.
Why are you discussing a system that isn't being used?More than 2.5 meter dude.
http://www.cricketweb.net/forum/cri...al-drs-discussion-thread-125.html#post3361524
Any response btw ?
Woke up at 5 in the morning for this.Don't be a frontrunner fan ffs
They need to drop him IMMEDIATELY. Send him back to India ffsRohit Sharma needs to perform before he mouths off at bowlers, he had a tangle with Steyn and now Johnson who have both owned him. At least Kohli has the stats to back up his talk.
Because it was brought up as justification.Why are you discussing a system that isn't being used?
Do you have any evidence that it isn't out?Because it was brought up as justification.
Do you think they're batting on a trampoline or something? Ever heard of gravity?Because it was brought up as justification.
How the hell would you simulate one ball hitting a crack for example which say hits below the knee role 3 Meter from the stumps ????
i could simulate how high it's going with pen and paper, right here and now, and assuming good inputs i'd get it exactly right. the difficulty comes in pinning down the precise point of impact on the pad, everything after that is basic high school mechanics.
the chance that the error in the point of impact is large enough to result in a 5cm+ error is very very small.
I was just giving my opinion that those kind of decisions on such a wicket are rarely given.Do you have any evidence that it isn't out?
Except for the ones that are plumb, like this one was.I was just giving my opinion that those kind of decisions on such a wicket are rarely given.
um, you don't? because the trajectory from after the ball bounces is treated as entirely independent of the trajectory before it bounces? i don't give a **** if it came from mars, all i need once it hits the pad is its position and momentum (which i can easily derive from the previous few frames so long it hasn't yorked him) i can do the rest from thereHow the hell would you simulate one ball hitting a crack for example which say hits below the knee role 3 Meter from the stumps ?
At best you could do it based on standard bounce of the wicket of previous balls but invariables are tough to calculate very accurately unless you wanna take decent time. That's also exactly the reason why they keep decisions over 2.5 meters out of the system as perceived margin of error is more.
Evidence?I was just giving my opinion that those kind of decisions on such a wicket are rarely given.