Zinzan
Request Your Custom Title Now!
ICC logicJono said:I've never actually thought of that before, but that is extremely odd and, well, stupid. We don't use video replays for lbws or edges, but we do for diving saves at the boundary.
ICC logicJono said:I've never actually thought of that before, but that is extremely odd and, well, stupid. We don't use video replays for lbws or edges, but we do for diving saves at the boundary.
Well it's more accurate than the umpires, who get something like 92% right.social said:Unfortunately, hawk-eye is only 98% accurate - that is why it isnt available for lbw's.
56% of statistics are made up.social said:Unfortunately, hawk-eye is only 98% accurate - that is why it isnt available for lbw's.
Yeah, but that's the info from the manufacturersScaly piscine said:56% of statistics are made up.
I'm not really calling for hawkeye. Replays to show pitching in line or looking for inside edges make sense though. Well, they make sense if we're gonna use them for diving saves at the boundary anyway.social said:Unfortunately, hawk-eye is only 98% accurate - that is why it isnt available for lbw's.
I find it hard to believe they've give such a percentage - what would they base such a number on?social said:Yeah, but that's the info from the manufacturers
Quoting the ABC analysts in response to a question as to why it isnt used as a matter of course.Scaly piscine said:I find it hard to believe they've give such a percentage - what would they base such a number on?
A margin of error is the sort of thing they'd produce.
So it gets 98.33% of lbws 'correct'? It's 98.33% accurate in relation to the distance the ball has travelled? It's 98.33% accurate in relation to the distance the ball has travelled after pitching? This "98.33% accurate" doesn't mean anything unless there's some context.social said:Quoting the ABC analysts in response to a question as to why it isnt used as a matter of course.
Apparently, greatest margin of error comes with full-pitched deliveries - the closer the ball pitches to the stumps, the less time there is for the cameras to make an accurate reading.
Overall, it's about 98.33% accurate.
During the Ashes, didn't they have to reconfigure the settings? It was when Shane Warne turned a ball a LOT. They said by Hawke-Eye's interpretation it was impossible.social said:Quoting the ABC analysts in response to a question as to why it isnt used as a matter of course.
Apparently, greatest margin of error comes with full-pitched deliveries - the closer the ball pitches to the stumps, the less time there is for the cameras to make an accurate reading.
Overall, it's about 98.33% accurate.
It's 100% accurate in relation to speed (speed of delivery as appears on your screen is provided by hawk-eye) but not direction.Scaly piscine said:So it gets 98.33% of lbws 'correct'? It's 98.33% accurate in relation to the distance the ball has travelled? It's 98.33% accurate in relation to the distance the ball has travelled after pitching? This "98.33% accurate" doesn't mean anything unless there's some context.
Given that the abuse is in Afrikaans, I think it's safe to assume that the perpetrators are either SA immigrants (in which case, they should be punted immediately) or unwelcome tourists.Langeveldt said:Shame about the shocking umpiring, I guess one just has to take the rough with the smooth and not get too angry about it..
And can somebody tell me why Shaun Pollock and Andre Nel are being called Kaffirs? I know many segments of the Aussie crowd have the IQ of a salad, and a bad one at that, but have they undergone Michael Jackson like operations?
that was going on ages ago.Langeveldt said:Shame about the shocking umpiring, I guess one just has to take the rough with the smooth and not get too angry about it..
And can somebody tell me why Shaun Pollock and Andre Nel are being called Kaffirs? I know many segments of the Aussie crowd have the IQ of a salad, and a bad one at that, but have they undergone Michael Jackson like operations?
I don't think it takes a degree in Afrikaans to know what a kaffir means! Still whoever it is it's pretty shocking behaviour and I hope the authorities come down nice and hard on them..social said:Given that the abuse is in Afrikaans, I think it's safe to assume that the perpetrators are either SA immigrants (in which case, they should be punted immediately) or unwelcome tourists.
whats a maggot?Slats4ever said:that was going on ages ago.
Get with the times
I've been to the SCG the last three days and today i got maggot on the bondary and started getting stuck in to the south africans.
I made AB DeVilliers laugh at one stage cos I kept on crapping on and calling him Fanie. Then I got more maggot and started calling Pollock "Ranger".
A state of intoxication.Langeveldt said:whats a maggot?
Given that the SA players were being abused about the treatment of people in the "rainbow nations" of the black townships, I think it's fair to say that it requires a greater knowledge of SA than 99.999999999999999% of Aus cricket fans will ever obtain.Langeveldt said:I don't think it takes a degree in Afrikaans to know what a kaffir means! Still whoever it is it's pretty shocking behaviour and I hope the authorities come down nice and hard on them..