• 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* India in South Africa

BoyBrumby

BoyBrumby

Englishman
silentstriker said:
Yea, that was high. Very unlucky.

This is disappointing. ICC get on the ball and make it part of the rules that UDRS must be used even if all the technology (e.g hotspot) is not available at every ground. Hawk-Eye seems to be available at most games, and that's certainly better than nothing.
Click to expand...
Quite so. To not use the system because some facets aren't available seems rather like a one-eyed man refusing to look out of his good eye because it doesn't give him stereoscopic vision.

Looked high in real time and Hawkeye backed up one's suspicion.

India have bowled suprebly tho, it must be said. Sree's ball to Kallis was a brutal gem.
 
Uppercut

Uppercut

Request Your Custom Title Now!
I hate the fact that they both went in favour of India too. Makes it less likely that the BCCI will stop being ****ing dickheads on the subject.

Although I think Harb's lbw shout against Prince might well have been given out on review. Lot of doubt- did he hit it, was it hitting the stumps, was he outside the line- as it turned out, no, yes, no respectively, but the umpire can't really give it out. Need technology for those.
 
KiWiNiNjA

KiWiNiNjA

International Coach
Cevno said:
They check the where the ball is going, but don't neccesarily give decisions based on it though.

It may be clearer in this case.

But in many cases the bowl has been shown to be hitting or missing the stumps and according to that the incorrect decision has stood.
There are cases as well where hawkeye has shown some ridiculous tracks of deliveries when all logic says it would have done something else.
Click to expand...
Ummm, no.

That makes no sense at all.

The incorrect decision standing? Hell no. If there is doubt then it goes back to the umpire. If there is clear evidence of the ball going well over the top, then of course it is going to be reversed. How hard is it to understand?
 
silentstriker

silentstriker

The Wheel is Forever
BoyBrumby said:
Quite so. To not use the system because some facets aren't available seems rather like a one-eyed man refusing to look out of his good eye because it doesn't give him stereoscopic vision.

Looked high in real time and Hawkeye backed up one's suspicion.

India have bowled suprebly tho, it must be said. Sree's ball to Kallis was a brutal gem.
Click to expand...
Yup. It's funny how quickly perceptions changed. If you look at the posters when the system was initially introduced, almost everyone was against it. Some were hilariously claiming that the wrong decisions actually were beneficial to the sport.

Yes, I'll gloat cause I've supported this for years. :p
 
morgieb

morgieb

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Why do India not want UDRS? I'm pretty sure the technology's there.....if Hot Spot isn't then surely Hawkeye is...
 
BoyBrumby

BoyBrumby

Englishman
Man, that's good. Vague suspicion of height again, but to bring it back into the right-hander like that is top, top swing bowling.

EDIT: Hawkeye's clearly wrong there, plotted the ball going on gunbarrel straight, but Zak had brought it back into Boucher. Hmm.
 
Last edited:
morgieb

morgieb

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Hawkeye might not be 100% accurate, but it's pretty close to it and way more accurate than your eyesight. If they aren't 100% sure, then the umpire's decision stands. That's pretty good to me.
 
Flem274*

Flem274*

123/5
silentstriker said:
Yup. It's funny how quickly perceptions changed. If you look at the posters when the system was initially introduced, almost everyone was against it. Some were hilariously claiming that the wrong decisions actually were beneficial to the sport.

Yes, I'll gloat cause I've supported this for years. :p
Click to expand...
That's not how I remember it.
 
Cevno

Cevno

Hall of Fame Member
silentstriker said:


Kumble didn't really have much turn. The reason he got 600 wickets is because of his bounce. His deliveries pretty much exploded off the pitch if there was uneven bounce.
Click to expand...
True ,but Kumble required uneven bounce.

I said Harbhajan is better in conditions where there is good carry ,because he gets it to bounce and turn ,more than Kumble with his overspin.

And don't think this pitch has had to much uneven bounce from a spinners length so far.

Kumble got a lot of his wickets LBW with the Low one or his top spinner but on this wicket he would not have got that turn or the real low bounce.
There really haven't been any balls kicking too much from spinners length as well.
 
Uppercut

Uppercut

Request Your Custom Title Now!
BoyBrumby said:
Man, that's good. Vague suspicion of height again, but to bring it back into the right-hander like that is top, top swing bowling.
Click to expand...
Missed it. Cricinfo says:

42.4 Khan to Boucher, OUT, oh my, that's a poor decision from Davis.


MV Boucher lbw b Khan 1 (6b 0x4 0x6) SR: 16.66
 
silentstriker

silentstriker

The Wheel is Forever
Another bad decision.


Sigh. SA should rightfully complain about this. They have every right to throw a hissy fit and refuse to play another series if BCCI want to be dickheads. Though the money involved means no one will refuse an Indian series. At least they should be making very strong objections to the ICC to make it a rule to implement it everywhere.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top