Shri
Mr. Glass
Bull ****. If every marginal decision was given out, it would be fair because the same rules apply for every one. The margin of error is decided by the 3rd umpire now which again gives a chance for human error in judgement.
-
Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
***Official*** DRS discussion thread
- Thread starter morgieb
- Start date
silentstriker
The Wheel is Forever
The margin of error is not decided by the third umpire...it's decided by hawkeye and if the decision is within its margin of error, than the original call stands..
Prince EWS
Global Moderator
For lbws? No it certainly isn't. It's judged by HawkEye.
BoyBrumby
Englishman
Exactly so.
Analogy I'd use the the "beyond reasonable doubt" burden of proof in criminal courts. If technology can prove beyond a reasonable doubt (i.e. within its accepted margins of error) the on field umpire was wrong the original shout is overturned, if not we go with the chap in the middle.
I just don't see an argument against having some kind of UDRS and we can argue the toss about the specifics to our hearts content. I'd personally like 3 challenges instead of two, but meh.
pup11
International Coach
For me that the main aim of UDRS is to avoid as many shockers as possible but the current way is not the right one.
The 3rd umpire should be allowed to overturn an on-field decision in case of a obvious error on the part of the on-field umpire, its would save time and would also help avoiding a situation where the players are constantly challenging an umpire's decision, which is something which barely happens in any other sport and it certainly shouldn't be happening in the ''gentleman's'' game....
The 3rd umpire should be allowed to overturn an on-field decision in case of a obvious error on the part of the on-field umpire, its would save time and would also help avoiding a situation where the players are constantly challenging an umpire's decision, which is something which barely happens in any other sport and it certainly shouldn't be happening in the ''gentleman's'' game....
Furball
Evil Scotsman
Rubbish.
If you're going to argue against something, then at least clue yourself up about it.
Furball
Evil Scotsman
Nah, the Cook and Clarke "dismissals" show why the players need to be able to challenge the umpire's decision.
Blaze 18
Banned
silentstriker
The Wheel is Forever
For what it's worth - it happens in the NFL whose system this is sort of modeled after. Each team gets two reviews per half. If you get both correct, you get a third one. If you lose a referral, you lose a time out.
The difference in cricket is that losing a referral is probably a bigger deal with the games lasting all day.
I think the compromise is very good to be honest.
I don't really mind having two, but three would be OK too. Any more and it's too much I think. I do think ICC should find some way to include 1) Hawk Eye, 2) Hot Spot, and 3) Snicko at every Test match. Easier said than done with the money issue, but I do think they help a lot. I know snicko takes too long to produce, but hopefully that's a technology issue that'll be fixed in the future.
slugger
State Vice-Captain
i dont know what the problem with the money issue is, all they need is a sponsor.... why all of a sudden do they have no business acumen when come to sorting this out. you just want a system that cant be cheated and batsmen are just gonna start walking because its gonna make em look stupid.
G.I.Joe
International Coach
Are you sure of that? Shouldn't synchronising the cameras take care of that? We can get a telecast to my home with all the frills in almost real time, but we can't get hawkeye to quickly work out a trajectory based off cameras placed at pre determined locations?It's not though.
Right now, there is a lot of post-processing involved in terms of ball trajectory (making sure the system picks up the ball at the right times, etc). There is a technician present who makes sure everything is going right and it takes a bit of time.
If you can get rid of it, you may want to work on it and offer to sell it to the ICC.
silentstriker
The Wheel is Forever
Yup. That's what it is right now. They had a little 'how it works' on it, and there is still a bit of manual stuff that has to take place. Maybe in the future.
silentstriker
The Wheel is Forever
vic_orthdox
Global Moderator
While it's not the main reason for them not using it, there's a certain irony about the board with the most money not using the referral system, when cost has been an issue for some of the other countries.
