its time to end the review system of umpiring

[shortpitched713]

I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt and assuming he doesn't actually think all these things but sees himself as an umpire and wants to encourage circumstances that makes them as important as possible

Honestly have had to bite my toungue this whole thread not to rampantly display an anti-authority streak, and fill this thread up with **** 12, and other such references.

 

[SteveNZ]

I think the ship has long sailed on 'getting rid of the howler'. Once you have the tech, people consider pretty much anything wrong to be a howler.

*pretty much anything that isn't in agreeance with their opinion/viewpoint.

Anyway, we all know that the soft signal is one of the biggest scourges on the game, and needs to go right away. Stokes had it right last week. Other than that, I don't have much of a problem with the review system, it gets right more decisions than we ever have (+)

+except when Nigel Llong is involved.

 

[Socerer 01]

*pretty much anything that isn't in agreeance with their opinion/viewpoint.

Anyway, we all know that the soft signal is one of the biggest scourges on the game, and needs to go right away. Stokes had it right last week. Other than that, I don't have much of a problem with the review system, it gets right more decisions than we ever have (+)

+except when Nigel Llong is involved.

think soft signal has been removed in the IpL after our team had some bad luck with it in internationals and it is all the better for it

 

[SillyCowCorner1]

Back in December of 2010, a visiting team of under-16 players from Trinidad came to our club to play against our youngsters.

I volunteered to be an umpire and officiate in the game since all other regular umpires were off.

So the Trinidad team batted first and our guys struck early removing both openers with hardly scoring anything.
Then there was this left-handed batsman who came in and started to smash it all over the place. I’m talking about big sixes and hitting crisp shots. I had the best seat in the house. I was umpiring at both ends.

So our captain, another lefty (SLA), was doing damage with the ball when the swashbuckling batter who was smashing it was not on strike…

But,

When they did locked horns against each other, the batsman respectedour captain and played the ball on its merit

And,

Finally our captain struck the dude on his back pad, looked plumb. Everyone was appealing. Loud.

I shook my head and with a commanding voice said , Not Out

I knew at the back of my mind that he was out, but I was enjoying his batting. So not out.

Well, it was gonna last for so long. They got bowled out for 150 or thereabouts and our boys chased it down with ease.

That dude who was hitting it all over the place was Nicholas Pooran.

Our captain, the SLA, was Gudakesh Motie

 

[ashley bach]

Back in December of 2010, a visiting team of under-16 players from Trinidad came to our club to play against our youngsters.

I volunteered to be an umpire and officiate in the game since all other regular umpires were off.

So the Trinidad team batted first and our guys struck early removing both openers with hardly scoring anything.
Then there was this left-handed batsman who came in and started to smash it all over the place. I’m talking about big sixes and hitting crisp shots. I had the best seat in the house. I was umpiring at both ends.

So our captain, another lefty (SLA), was doing damage with the ball when the swashbuckling batter who was smashing it was not on strike…

But,

When they did locked horns against each other, the batsman respectedour captain and played the ball on its merit

And,

Finally our captain struck the dude on his back pad, looked plumb. Everyone was appealing. Loud.

I shook my head and with a commanding voice said , Not Out

I knew at the back of my mind that he was out, but I was enjoying his batting. So not out.

Well, it was gonna last for so long. They got bowled out for 150 or thereabouts and our boys chased it down with ease.

That dude who was hitting it all over the place was Nicholas Pooran.

Our captain, the SLA, was Gudakesh Motie

LOL in a commanding voice ''not out''
You filthy dirty stinking little cheat

 

[SteveNZ]

think soft signal has been removed in the IpL after our team had some bad luck with it in internationals and it is all the better for it

Great, that is a step forward. Soft signal is necessary in sports like rugby league where vision can be obscured, but it is absolutely unnecessary in cricket where you have more than enough camera angles and information to make the right decision. Even in those rare ones like bounced catches, the third umpire has the ability to make a better, more considered decision than the guy on field in real time. I could see that they could make a provision that there is the ability to go back on field and go with their opinion if there is a rare occasion the third umpire can't get sufficient vision. But that would be very, very rare.

 

[SillyCowCorner1]

LOL in a commanding voice ''not out''
You filthy dirty stinking little cheat

Oh come on, I made the game more competitive (at least that’s what I think.)

Pooran owes me a few thousand bucks

 

[Flem274*]

The review system is dumb because

a) Players are morons and pointless review things all the time
b) The reviews have to be limited because they're morons, and so you get situations where all the reviews are burned and a bad decision goes uncorrected
c) Umpires don't have the authority to use all the tech available whenever they want to, so they're still making human errors when we literally have all the tech there to correct it.

The easiest and most common sense fix is to let umpires use the tech whenever they want to. That way if there is any doubt in their mind, or if the match situation is extremely critical, they can fall back on the tech to make the right call. It won't slow the game much further because you're saving all the time lost from players making dumb reviews, and you are going to get correct decisions made throughout the game. It also puts all the onus of decision making solely on the match officials, instead of right now where players get criticized for not using the review system well.

so other sports can do this, and it turns out the umpires are also either morons or on the take. cricket is better because the players have more direct control on what does get reviewed. the amount of times i've seen an nrl ref just not check the storm but nitpick every lower table side...

player stupidity is at least funny. we wouldn't have the shane watson hall of fame without player reviews.

 

[SillyCowCorner1]

 

[Flem274*]

The first time an umpire backed himself on something he thought was plumb, and didn't use the tech, but the ball was found to be slightly going over the stumps on ball tracking- it'd make the whole new procedure a joke

this as well, because you know they wouldn't be doing it for kemar roach. they would definitely be doing it because india or england have spent all morning sooking in the umpires face.

you can really tell cnerd has lived a life blessedly unaffected by the Crusaders or the Melbourne Storm.

 

[TheJediBrah]

so other sports can do this, and it turns out the umpires are also either morons or on the take. cricket is better because the players have more direct control on what does get reviewed. the amount of times i've seen an nrl ref just not check the storm but nitpick every lower table side...

player stupidity is at least funny. we wouldn't have the shane watson hall of fame without player reviews.

Yeah been proven beyond doubt that these systems are way better in the hands of the players than in the hands of the umpires

 

[Spark]

Great, that is a step forward. Soft signal is necessary in sports like rugby league where vision can be obscured, but it is absolutely unnecessary in cricket where you have more than enough camera angles and information to make the right decision. Even in those rare ones like bounced catches, the third umpire has the ability to make a better, more considered decision than the guy on field in real time. I could see that they could make a provision that there is the ability to go back on field and go with their opinion if there is a rare occasion the third umpire can't get sufficient vision. But that would be very, very rare.

Yeah the soft signal was a necessity in the days where third umpires genuinely were consistently ruling very obvious catches (because the hands were clearly under the ball) as not out because of foreshortening. But umpire education has improved drastically so it's no longer necessary.

 

[honestbharani]

Yeah the soft signal was a necessity in the days where third umpires genuinely were consistently ruling very obvious catches (because the hands were clearly under the ball) as not out because of foreshortening. But umpire education has improved drastically so it's no longer necessary.

The bole is in his hands, Mariyeeeeeeeee

 

[SteveNZ]

Yeah the soft signal was a necessity in the days where third umpires genuinely were consistently ruling very obvious catches (because the hands were clearly under the ball) as not out because of foreshortening. But umpire education has improved drastically so it's no longer necessary.

Absolutely. I think there's a very human social reason that soft signal has short comings. If a decision (in any sport) gets sent up a certain way with a soft signal and it's a tight, hard to decipher call...who is that video official going to go with? Are they able to be neutral, or is the pull towards the on field guy who he shares a profession, dressing room etc with going to play a part? I've just never liked it. I've never thought it's it's best, most efficient, least influenced way to get to, or near, the right decision every time

 

[SillyCowCorner1]

The same thing about catches being reviewed in the NFL…most of the time it stays with the on-field decision.

Fumbles are also interesting to see when it gets reviewed.

Man, the rules in the NFL are interesting, at times can be confusing.

 

[shortpitched713]

Man, the rules in the NFL are interesting, at times can be confusing.

As an American, in actuality they're just bonkers, and at times racially (or money/marketing) motivated. Yeah, I said it.

 

[RossTaylorsBox]

Would love to hear an explanation about how NFL rules are racially motivated.

 

[shortpitched713]

Quarterback protection rules to keep primarily white quarterbacks in a better position by absolving them from the inherent physicality of the sport. Can barely breath on Tom Brady without getting a roughing the passer call.

On the other hand runners do not get such protection, except again primarily quarterbacks when they're "giving themselves up" by sliding to avoid contact. There is now literally a move in which a quarterback will fake a slide to prevent a defender from attempting to tackle him, and then keep running.

It's bonkers, and a far cry from the sport that I grew up watching, and any long-time watcher would have to be willfully ignorant of the sporting climate, culture, and history in America to not connect the dots as to the reason why such an environment was cultivated.

 

[SteveNZ]

Quarterback protection rules to keep primarily white quarterbacks in a better position by absolving them from the inherent physicality of the sport. Can barely breath on Tom Brady without getting a roughing the passer call.

On the other hand runners do not get such protection, except again primarily quarterbacks when they're "giving themselves up" by sliding to avoid contact. There is now literally a move in which a quarterback will fake a slide to prevent a defender from attempting to tackle him, and then keep running.

It's bonkers, and a far cry from the sport that I grew up watching, and any long-time watcher would have to be willfully ignorant of the sporting climate, culture, and history in America to not connect the dots as to the reason why such an environment was cultivated.

Sorry, but that's wrong.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/2021/09/10/black-quarterbacks-nfl-2021/

You could have talked about stacking, which has historically been an 'issue' and has basis in team sports like the NFL, rugby league and union. If anyone doesn't know what stacking is, it is the stereotype of white players being more intelligent and better decision makers, therefore playing key positions like quarterback, halfback, first five-eighth etc; and 'athletic, strength-first' black players into other positions. Brain v brawn.

And the history of the NFL would have probably backed you up (as it would in the NRL rugby league competition, the All Blacks rugby union team etc) but a modern-day analysis wouldn't.

How many current quarterbacks in the NFL are black? Is it more than half? It could well be, or close. And you're claiming racism over a rule that protects every single one of them, regardless of their skin colour. That sort of viewpoint only creates further division in race, which judging by your desire to isolate it as a race issue, suggests it is something you'd not like to exist. That roughing the passer rule - and it's fair enough if you disagree with it - is to protect a player who is in a vulnerable position. A person running into a defensive line is not passive or vulnerable - they are taking on the line. It's the same in rugby league/union with kickers. Yeah OK, I'll suggest there's some preciousness about protecting the golden boys of the game from physicality. But **** me, it isn't racism.

 

[Flem274*]

in modern times referee led proofs tend to favour major teams, rather than ethnicities, when it comes to golden child rules.

*points at Storm and Crusaders*

as good of a bloke as he seems to be, nelson asofa-solomona can play BJJ with the player he tackles but if you tackle him and you don't get off him immediately some prissy aussie **** of a ref is blasting on his whistle.

edit - as a side note it's a shame such a high quality player who could have been professional at both codes (maybe even AFL if we had a culture of it in NZ) decided to waste his professional career at the storm. a true loss for oceania sport.