nah i've seen this sentiment going around more and more and it really shits me. for some reason people are suddenly questioning whether a mere noise is enough to give out caught behinds, despite it having been more than sufficient for 150 years. really worried it's going to start getting traction soon as we move deeper into the DRS era.
Not really what I was suggesting. The on-field umpire’s decision was contended. There is a system to make an assessment for such situations. Once you go to the third umpire, there should be a fairly established and clear benchmark for making a decision using the tools available. I don’t see how proposing to simplify the decision process and reduce subjectivity is ruining the game.
I just think this comes down to the confidence administrators of the game have for the tech. I dont think they believe snicko/hotspot/hawkeye are good enough to remove the subjective judgement of the third umpire from the equation.
Really hope Dravid takes him under his wing. There's so much latent potential there, he just needs to learn to bide his time when new at the crease.
You would need a rigorous study of the different noises snicko detects and an extensive training program before such a thing could be even contemplated. Subjective judgment based on experience > arbitrary thresholds otherwise, every time.
It’s not arbitrary. It’s based on empirical data and theory. This is how all scientific and engineering tool measurements work. I’m baffled by the thinking that establishing measurement tolerance levels for a sound detector is an impossible task.
How do you intend on gathering such data and theory without doing a study? Scientific measurements do not work by just winging it and throwing a few numbers around.
Why do you presume there would be no study or that I suggested there should be no study?
