2nd Test at the MCG, Melbourne, 26 Dec - 30 Dec 2020

[cnerd123]

Live I can see why it wasn't given. But it was basically hitting half the stumps!

Hawkeye is not absolute truth. Stop worshipping it.

 

[Spikey]

ahahahaha

 

[stephen]

Damn it Hazelwood, that makes Ashwin's figures acceptable.

 

[Gnske]

69

 

[Burgey]

So sick of these commentators thinking ball tracking is 100% accurate. Everytime it's the same dribble ignoring the calculated half ball margin of error

Brett Lee saying predictive ball tracking is unfair because front foot no balls are scrutinised so closely explains why he was such a vocal supporter of Tony Abbott.

nice one Haze

 

[Tom Flint]

Haze not fancying putting the pads on after lunch

 

[stephen]

Anyway, nearly twice as many runs as we need.

 

[cnerd123]

See what can be accomplished when you just bowl properly Ash

 

[Spark]

Hawkeye is not absolute truth. Stop worshipping it.

i mean it's a damn sight better than "well it looked high live"

 

[Spark]

now there's a good, solid #11's dismissal.

 

[Gnske]

i mean it's a damn sight better than "well it looked high live"

In that case why even bother having umpires. cnerd123 has proven for years that umpires can barely do anything nor can be expected to do the bare minimum expected of a human being with eyes. It always comes back to the technology anyway.

Have robots on wheels standing at square leg and behind the stumps. Decision making will improve by 200%

 

[Senile Sentry]

Congrats Ausfor finally getting to 200.

 

[Nintendo]

The visuals for drs aren't supposed to give a 100% accurate view right? More just a visual factor for the mathematics behind the tech. If the eggheads believe there's doubt with it and certain things need to be umpires call then I don't get why we should doubt there mathematical insight.

 

[cnerd123]

i mean it's a damn sight better than "well it looked high live"

A) how would we know? Have there been any tests run comparing accuracy of humans vs hawkeye?
B) even if it is more accurate, umpire's call exists because there is an error margin in Hawkeye. The developers of the system put that in. The projection is not absolute truth and that's why in borderline cases they don't overturn the on field call.

 

[Gnske]

I'll also add that when it comes to reviewing technology, its universally always the human element that ruins it. Remove the human element from umpiring and the decision is pure and righteous.

 

[Spark]

The visuals for drs aren't supposed to give a 100% accurate view right? More just a visual factor for the mathematics behind the tech. If the eggheads believe there's doubt with it and certain things need to be umpires call then I don't get why we should doubt there mathematical insight.

that's all fair but like i don't think there's quite that much uncertainty, especially with regards to height. the threshold should be the top of the actual stumps, including the bails, not the middle of them.

 

[Flem274*]

A) how would we know? Have there been any tests run comparing accuracy of humans vs hawkeye?
B) even if it is more accurate, umpire's call exists because there is an error margin in Hawkeye. The developers of the system put that in. The projection is not absolute truth and that's why in borderline cases they don't overturn the on field call.

the ministry of truth speaks

 

[silentstriker]

In that case why even bother having umpires. cnerd123 has proven for years that umpires can barely do anything nor can be expected to do the bare minimum expected of a human being with eyes. It always comes back to the technology anyway.

Have robots on wheels standing at square leg and behind the stumps. Decision making will improve by 200%

It would take too long. If you could have instant decisions with technology, I would be in favor of all decisions being made by technology.

 

[Spark]

A) how would we know? Have there been any tests run comparing accuracy of humans vs hawkeye?
B) even if it is more accurate, umpire's call exists because there is an error margin in Hawkeye. The developers of the system put that in. The projection is not absolute truth and that's why in borderline cases they don't overturn the on field call.

i'm pretty sure they have and it's been shown to be way, way more accurate. there are reasons for umpire's call beyond accuracy.

 

[Gnske]

A) how would we know? Have there been any tests run comparing accuracy of humans vs hawkeye?

After watching the BBL for the last month, I'd put my money on the machines.

If you made an umpiring machine that gave decisions like Kumar Dharmasena, it'd be landfill. You'd take a 2 x 4 timber to it like what happens to Johnny 5 in Short Circuit 2, no doubt about it.