• 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.

The value of Chanderpaul

marc71178

Eyes not spreadsheets
Richard said:
The hint is in the term - on-field.
Unless I'm very much mistaken, the stands (especially at nice big fields like Lord's) aren't on the field.
Anyway, it's been proven time and again that TV views (albeit with the help of slo-mo, freeze-frames, different angles, red-zones and batsman-fades) often get decisions more accurate than on-field Umpires.
TV also has many occasions where it takes several replays to confirm the umpire was in fact correct first time...
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Yep - an all-too-often forgotten fact.
Still, doesn't explain how a seat in the stands is better than a seat in front of the telly.
 

marc71178

Eyes not spreadsheets
From the stands, you can see the whole picture, not just what some director wants you to see.
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
True - you can see all the things that are comparatively irrelevant but fascinating nonetheless (fielding routines etc.).
The important stuff is always conveyed before too long. Like the actual deliveries.
 

Top