TheJediBrah
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Right-hand BatLook at his Twitter feed. Completely cooked.
Right-arm Medium
Right-wing politics
Right-hand BatLook at his Twitter feed. Completely cooked.
What is this absolute twaddleNot sure that's a good thing. Umpires are closer to the action than tv cameras which can show a deceptive picture at times.
One thing that will come out of this is that there will be more rock-and-rolling...Looks like the umpires soft signal rule is to be scrapped.
Not sure that's a good thing. Umpires are closer to the action than tv cameras which can show a deceptive picture at times.
Video cameras aren't perfect and we don't have angles for everything. Removing a level of oversight and leaving it up to 3rd umps who often aren't savvy with the tech or even understand the process is a disaster waiting to happen.What is this absolute twaddle
Plain English but if you need it explaining...the two men in white coats on the field are in a better position to judge if a catch has been taken cleanly with their own eyes than a TV camera that can only provide two dimensional images and therefore cannot always prove conclusively whether a catch has been taken cleanly from the images on screen.What is this absolute twaddle
no they're notPlain English but if you need it explaining...the two men in white coats on the field are in a better position to judge if a catch has been taken cleanly with their own eyes than a TV camera that can only provide two dimensional images and therefore cannot always prove conclusively whether a catch has been taken cleanly from the images on screen.
I can absolutely guarantee you that two people watching in real time, who may not be anywhere near the optimal angle (and could be 70 metres away for outfield catches) will not do a better job than the camera.Plain English but if you need it explaining...the two men in white coats on the field are in a better position to judge if a catch has been taken cleanly with their own eyes than a TV camera that can only provide two dimensional images and therefore cannot always prove conclusively whether a catch has been taken cleanly from the images on screen.
Video cameras have far less uncertainty than a guy trying to see the catch in real time many metres away, and where in many cases the decision if a catch has carried will come down to either a guess or taking the fielder's word.Video cameras aren't perfect and we don't have angles for everything. Removing a level of oversight and leaving it up to 3rd umps who often aren't savvy with the tech or even understand the process is a disaster waiting to happen.
Generally speaking the cameras are more reliable than then on field umpires and the DRS has been a great success, even if teams occasionally do not use it appropriately. I would make an exception however for low catches where the camera can make it seem that the ball is closer to or even touching the ground when it is not. I recall many years ago commentators demonstrating this on the outfield, showing how, to a camera facing the fielder, the ball appeared to be on the ground even though from side on it was clearly not touching it.I can absolutely guarantee you that two people watching on teal time, who may not be anywhere near the optimal angle (and could be 70 metres away for outfield catches) will not do a better job than the camera.
Video cameras have far less uncertainty than a guy trying to see the catch in real time many metres away, and where in many cases the decision if a catch has carried will come down to either a guess or taking the fielder's word.
Still not an exception. The on field umpires' only option in that situation is to guess from a distance away.Generally speaking the cameras are more reliable than then on field umpires and the DRS has been a great success, even if teams occasionally do not use it appropriately. I would make an exception however for low catches where the camera can make it seem that the ball is closer to or even touching the ground when it is not. I recall many years ago commentators demonstrating this on the outfield, showing how, to a camera facing the fielder, the ball appeared to be on the ground even though from side on it was clearly not touching it.
Just dip popcorn chicken in supercharge sauceZinger balls
A problem is that cameras aren't covering everything all the time though, and it's not like the 2 dudes watching in real time are no name hacks like us here. You have to guess either way unless you want to increase the budget for that level of coverage.I can absolutely guarantee you that two people watching in real time, who may not be anywhere near the optimal angle (and could be 70 metres away for outfield catches) will not do a better job than the camera.
Video cameras have far less uncertainty than a guy trying to see the catch in real time many metres away, and where in many cases the decision if a catch has carried will come down to either a guess or taking the fielder's word.