marc71178
Eyes not spreadsheets
But he had something conclusive, a ****ing sound on his earpiece from the enhanced sound he gets. How difficult is it for you to comprehend?
-
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
very difficult mate, very difficult...but since u have comprehended it properly, i don't know
Spark
Global Moderator
so many awtas
GIMH
Norwood's on Fire
Well said Migara
Jacknife
International Captain
Spot on. I think we're seeing since the improvement in the stump mics that the umpires are using that technology better, hardly controversial this one though because he was out.
marc71178
Eyes not spreadsheets
Agreed, although in this case I'm not sure where the UDRS shocker was, there only being one review in the game and in that case the 3rd umpire using the technology available to him to get the right decision.
Cevno
Hall of Fame Member
bhogleharsha Harsha Bhogle
dhoni says dravid said he did not edge it. that should be good enough now for everybody. drs has had a very bad week.
bhogleharsha Harsha Bhogle
dhoni says dravid said he did not edge it. that should be good enough now for everybody. drs has had a very bad week.
bhogleharsha Harsha Bhogle
there is also the possibility though, that hot spot was right and that the sound came from somewhere else. in all, it was a poor verdict.
Remember last time a similar incident happened, Dravid admitted himself that he thought according to his instincts he edged it.
dhoni says dravid said he did not edge it. that should be good enough now for everybody. drs has had a very bad week.
bhogleharsha Harsha Bhogle
dhoni says dravid said he did not edge it. that should be good enough now for everybody. drs has had a very bad week.
bhogleharsha Harsha Bhogle
there is also the possibility though, that hot spot was right and that the sound came from somewhere else. in all, it was a poor verdict.
Remember last time a similar incident happened, Dravid admitted himself that he thought according to his instincts he edged it.
Cevno
Hall of Fame Member
I still exactly don't know how he was given out," said Dhoni. "Whether they used Snickometer, whether Snickometer is allowed to be used, whether the audio technician gave him out, whether the third umpire gave him out. So it is quite complex. There is affair amount of questions when it comes to the DRS and if there is still some doubt, why shouldn't go to the batsman."
As for Dravid, his latest extraction followed two eyebrow-raising dismissals in the final two Tests at Edgbaston, where he was caught behind off his shoe lace, and at The Oval, where he was given out caught at bat-pad off Graeme Swann despite a lack of clear evidence. On that occasion, he defused the subsequent row by admitting he had got a thin inside-edge, but this time, he was not so conciliatory.
"He said he had not edged it," Dhoni said. "There was no mark when it comes to Hot Spot. There was no visual deflection as such. And the umpire had given not out. I thought the benefit of doubt goes to the batsman. That is a big thing."
England v India, 1st ODI, Chester-le-Street: MS Dhoni questions DRS handling | Cricket News | England v India 2011 | ESPN Cricinfo
As for Dravid, his latest extraction followed two eyebrow-raising dismissals in the final two Tests at Edgbaston, where he was caught behind off his shoe lace, and at The Oval, where he was given out caught at bat-pad off Graeme Swann despite a lack of clear evidence. On that occasion, he defused the subsequent row by admitting he had got a thin inside-edge, but this time, he was not so conciliatory.
"He said he had not edged it," Dhoni said. "There was no mark when it comes to Hot Spot. There was no visual deflection as such. And the umpire had given not out. I thought the benefit of doubt goes to the batsman. That is a big thing."
England v India, 1st ODI, Chester-le-Street: MS Dhoni questions DRS handling | Cricket News | England v India 2011 | ESPN Cricinfo
zaremba
Cricketer Of The Year
Yessirreee
Vijay.Sharma
School Boy/Girl Captain
I don't believe that. I think HawkEye is even more inaccurate than Hit Spot.
And no one knows the true reasons for BCCI accepting Hot Spot...neither have Hot Spot nor have BCCI presented the scientific justification for agreeing to Hot Spot. My intuition tells me they fell for the bit that Hit Spot tech is used in military stuff.
I am actually very disappointed with both these gadgets...they haven't added much to the DRS. In fact a DRs sans these two would give us better results...in any case we are not bothered about knife edge ones...and to over turn howlers you dont need these gadgets...just simple, plain replays are more than sufficient.
Last edited:
zaremba
Cricketer Of The Year
Hot Spot is useful - there are many occasions when it gives absolutely clear evidence that a ball has been hit, and many occasions when it tells you that the ball has hit, say, the batsman's sleeve rather than his glove, or that the bat has brushed the pad.
The danger with hot spot is that very thin edges may not always show up. But we all know that, and so do 3rd umpires, and provided they bear that in mind, and remember that the absence of evidence on hot spot of an edge is not necessarily proof that there was no edge, all will be well.
The danger with hot spot is that very thin edges may not always show up. But we all know that, and so do 3rd umpires, and provided they bear that in mind, and remember that the absence of evidence on hot spot of an edge is not necessarily proof that there was no edge, all will be well.
benchmark00
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Hahaha that's a great post. Genuinely lol'd.very difficult mate, very difficult...but since u have comprehended it properly, i don't know
Edged&Taken
U19 Vice-Captain
United Dravid Removal System
nsniks
State Vice-Captain
that's just too good
I hope none minds what i will say. Anyone who opposes UDRS or DRS is stupid because of one very simple reason.
Before UDRS was introduced, i remember being afraid of a poor decision that could change the game. UDRS might not be a perfect system, but everyone will agree that people tend to cry less over decisions.Technology isn't perfect i remeber i still can't believe that in World Cup semi, ball was missing leg stump when hawk eye showed it missing but that's the way it goes. But umpiring faults like the one in oval test i think where umpire gave dravid out, was umpiring fault.
Before UDRS was introduced, i remember being afraid of a poor decision that could change the game. UDRS might not be a perfect system, but everyone will agree that people tend to cry less over decisions.Technology isn't perfect i remeber i still can't believe that in World Cup semi, ball was missing leg stump when hawk eye showed it missing but that's the way it goes. But umpiring faults like the one in oval test i think where umpire gave dravid out, was umpiring fault.
Cevno
Hall of Fame Member
Vijay.Sharma
School Boy/Girl Captain
Time to ditch the gadgets in DRS...
...and use simple, plain replays to overturn obvious howlers?
I think there are many points in favor of the above -
a. DRS with all its gadgets has shown to be inaccurate
b. It looks awful when the different gadgets used don't agree with each other
c. Too many procedural requirements means it converts what should be a straight forward case into a complex enactment
d. Procedures used in the implementation themselves are pretty arbitrary and stupid
e. Does not allow umpires the benefit of replays and provides players the advantage of many gadgets (albeit useless ones) to challenge the umpire
f. Rolled throughput yield of the decision making process in fact reduces the accuracy of decision making when DRS is used.
ps: for all the talk of bcci's hegemony, money power, etc, etc, they seemed to have done their own 'learning' inconspicuously behind the scenes
...and use simple, plain replays to overturn obvious howlers?
I think there are many points in favor of the above -
a. DRS with all its gadgets has shown to be inaccurate
b. It looks awful when the different gadgets used don't agree with each other
c. Too many procedural requirements means it converts what should be a straight forward case into a complex enactment
d. Procedures used in the implementation themselves are pretty arbitrary and stupid
e. Does not allow umpires the benefit of replays and provides players the advantage of many gadgets (albeit useless ones) to challenge the umpire
f. Rolled throughput yield of the decision making process in fact reduces the accuracy of decision making when DRS is used.
ps: for all the talk of bcci's hegemony, money power, etc, etc, they seemed to have done their own 'learning' inconspicuously behind the scenes