Australia v New Zealand 2nd Test at the MCG December 26-30

[Wedge McManus]

They will

Well if that's the case let's make sure Neil Wagner and Sir Richard Hadlee are kept on ice to prop these useless black caps up if that happens

 

[deanc]

No I didn't miss the bit where the colour changes but you missed the bit where the images are not the same. You also missed the bit where it was explained that DRS does NOT show the actual point of impact because its a projection onto a LATER image after the batsman has moved.

If you want to compare point of impact and DRS point of impact, you need to use the exact same image at the exact same time before the batsman moves, otherwise you cannot possibly get a plotted point of impact that exactly matches the filmed point of impact.

Clearly the batsman has moved between the two images, which explains why you are seeing a difference. If you didn't see any difference, then DRS would be wrong

Interestingly both Paine and Taylor's respective LBW's looked OUT live - yet on both occasions DRS reversed the umpires decision?
Again live, if you remove the pads; it looked like Paine's off-stump would of been flattened and Taylor's middle stump would of been cart-wheeling back to the keeper...

 

[Plugger35]

What were they supposed to do? Let them enjoy a boxing day test they'll never ever get another one

The overall attendance was the 2nd biggest non Ashes Boxing Day test attendance since the West Indies back in the mid 70s, CA will want to get NZ back for another Boxing Day test for that reason alone. If NZ can produce a more competitive performance the attendance will probably be even bigger.

Clap them, not persist with the chants and dancing around.

At least they provided some atmosphere and helped make a mostly dull match seem more exciting, better than having quiet crowds or no crowds at all.

 

[ROOTA#6]

People forget how hard opening the batting at test level is.

Can’t say I’ve ever done it in the first place to then be able to forget how tough it is!

 

[Wedge McManus]

The overall attendance was the 2nd biggest non Ashes Boxing Day test attendance since the West Indies back in the mid 70s, CA will want to get NZ back for another Boxing Day test for that reason alone. If NZ can produce a more competitive performance the attendance will probably be even bigger.



At least they provided some atmosphere and helped make a mostly dull match seem more exciting, better than having quiet crowds or no crowds at all.

I noticed you went a bit quiet yesterday when your constant crap posting found it's mark. If Oz had to cop it I reckon you could think about how you post too

 

[footyfan1978]

And the race to be offended makes its' way into a cricket forum now...………...

ha ha. Some one is awake.

 

[DangerSloane]

No I didn't miss the bit where the colour changes but you missed the bit where the images are not the same. You also missed the bit where it was explained that DRS does NOT show the actual point of impact because its a projection onto a LATER image after the batsman has moved.

If you want to compare point of impact and DRS point of impact, you need to use the exact same image at the exact same time before the batsman moves, otherwise you cannot possibly get a plotted point of impact that exactly matches the filmed point of impact.

Clearly the batsman has moved between the two images, which explains why you are seeing a difference. If you didn't see any difference, then DRS would be wrong

If thats the case then the system cannot be used.
If it cannot get the point of impact correct because the batsman moved afterwards then its too flawed to be used.

Fact is he was struck outside the line and DRS decided it was in line. The incorrect decision was reached, regardless of whether you think the images did this that and the other.

Regardless of whether the two images are different or the same...the first image is where and when the ball struck the pad in real time (what the umpire saw), not where the DRS system determined it struck the pad.

It was plain as day in real time that it had stuffed up.

Plain enough that Paine could see it on the big screen

 

[DangerSloane]

Pills i'd say.

Thats the excuse boring people use when others are having fun

"oh well they must be on pills"

 

[DangerSloane]

Can’t say I’ve ever done it in the first place to then be able to forget how tough it is!

You do not need to have done something to understand its difficulty.

I haven't climbed mount Everest but I can certainly appreciate that its a difficult task.

 

[iluvparis]

If thats the case then the system cannot be used.
If it cannot get the point of impact correct because the batsman moved afterwards then its too flawed to be used.

Fact is he was struck outside the line and DRS decided it was in line. The incorrect decision was reached, regardless of whether you think the images did this that and the other.

Regardless of whether the two images are different or the same...the first image is where and when the ball struck the pad in real time (what the umpire saw), not where the DRS system determined it struck the pad.

It was plain as day in real time that it had stuffed up.

You are missing the point - DRS can get the point of impact - they just don't show it properly on the TV screen that goes to the broadcaster (i.e. the batsmen has moved further through the shot by that stage)

 

[Woody15]

Pretty good explanation on how DRS is used and how the point of impact is determined

 

[Howard Littlejohn]

I think it’s played at Lord’s regardless of who the sides are.

For this iteration at least. I'm guessing it will always be a pre-determined location, otherwise a variety iof dates would need to be left open.
I expect Eden Gardens the next time around.

 

[Baird]

honestly who can stop us?

 

[imperial_oz]

Interestingly both Paine and Taylor's respective LBW's looked OUT live - yet on both occasions DRS reversed the umpires decision?
Again live, if you remove the pads; it looked like Paine's off-stump would of been flattened and Taylor's middle stump would of been cart-wheeling back to the keeper...

Thats hardly surprising. The TV cameras are on different angles to the DRS cameras, so looking different makes sense.

The issue with DRS is it is very accurate up to the point where it goes from tracking to projecting. DRS is not capable of completely assessing EXACTLY what the ball will do because swing can change or the bounce might be more or less depending on the speed of the ball. It does a pretty good job of estimating but without being able to take every factor into account like, wind velocity, temperature, air pressure, moisture content etc perfection is unobtainable but you can get a good estimation probably down to millimetre level or a centimetre or two at the outside.

It is also having to be assembled according to the rules. If the ball bounces, it can project where the ball is likely to go. If it's on the full, the rules state that the ball is to be treated as going straight from that point, so no variations of height, angle or positioning

 

[Plugger35]

I noticed you went a bit quiet yesterday when your constant crap posting found it's mark. If Oz had to cop it I reckon you could think about how you post too

The match was over by then and my post that he responded to was just saying that Blundell should've been MOTM instead of Head which isn't that outrageous as Blundell scored his hundred as an opener against a better bowling attack but the MOTM usually goes to a player on the winning side so it wasn't surprising that Head got it.

 

[imperial_oz]

If thats the case then the system cannot be used.
If it cannot get the point of impact correct because the batsman moved afterwards then its too flawed to be used.

Fact is he was struck outside the line and DRS decided it was in line. The incorrect decision was reached, regardless of whether you think the images did this that and the other.

Regardless of whether the two images are different or the same...the first image is where and when the ball struck the pad in real time (what the umpire saw), not where the DRS system determined it struck the pad.

It was plain as day in real time that it had stuffed up.

Plain enough that Paine could see it on the big screen

Thats not correct. It plots the point of impact relative to the line between the stumps. You are saying it has to be relative to the batsman which it cannot be unless they use the exact same image. They do not, so you can only judge by the stump lines not the batsman's legs

 

[Wedge McManus]

The match was over by then and my post that he responded to was just saying that Blundell should've been MOTM instead of Head which isn't that outrageous as Blundell scored his hundred as an opener against a better bowling attack but the MOTM usually goes to a player on the winning side so it wasn't surprising that Head got it.

I think we both know what I meant by my comment. I know it's fun to be devils advocate but you do tend to go on about us cheating and throwing shade at us constantly. One bloke bit back and went a bit overboard but essentially he had had enough. I don't blame him. Just my two cents but you have to own a bit of yesterday's outcome

 

[DangerSloane]

Thats not correct. It plots the point of impact relative to the line between the stumps. You are saying it has to be relative to the batsman which it cannot be unless they use the exact same image. They do not, so you can only judge by the stump lines not the batsman's legs

The images are not at a sufficiently differnet angle to show one hitting the inside and one hitting the outside of the pad.
You are over complicating this severely. The ball tracking (well at least the point of impact) was miles out. Fans knew it, Paine knew it, New Zealand knew it, the commentators knew it.

Interestingly both Paine and Taylor's respective LBW's looked OUT live - yet on both occasions DRS reversed the umpires decision?
Again live, if you remove the pads; it looked like Paine's off-stump would of been flattened and Taylor's middle stump would of been cart-wheeling back to the keeper...

The big difference is Paine's hit him outside the line of off so it didnt actually matter if it was hitting every stump in existence.

 

[DangerSloane]

Pretty good explanation on how DRS is used and how the point of impact is determined

The ball has impacted the pad for multiple frames before he pauses that.
He even explains that its a HUMAN DECISION where the ball strikes the pad.

So one guy in the booth is responsible for deciding point of impact. Explains a lot.

 

[imperial_oz]

The images are not at a sufficiently differnet angle to show one hitting the inside and one hitting the outside of the pad.
You are over complicating this severely. The ball tracking (well at least the point of impact) was miles out.



The big difference is Paine's hit him outside the line so it didnt actually matter if it was hitting every stump in existence.

Well, I guess you are going to completely ignore the obvious in spite of it being explained.

You simply cannot make that claim based on two different images. That is entirely illogical. You could make that judgement if the images were absolutely identical but if the batsman moves between the images, how can you possibly expect ball tracking relative to the stump lines (which do not move) to also be relative to a moving batsman. that is utterly impossible.

Additionally, ball tracking has been shown to be accurate. The issue with ball tracking and accuracy comes in at the projection part, not the tracking. The science behind using multiple cameras to create 3D spatial tracking is well understood and well proven. I suspect it might be a little more accurate that watching it on TV while not understand where the ball tracking is being referenced.

 

[DangerSloane]

You are missing the point - DRS can get the point of impact - they just don't show it properly on the TV screen that goes to the broadcaster (i.e. the batsmen has moved further through the shot by that stage)

Except that video backstage at DRS explains that its a completely human decision where the ball impacted along the computer tracked journey.

 

[Woody15]

The ball has impacted the pad for multiple frames before he pauses that.
He even explains that its a HUMAN DECISION where the ball strikes the pad.

So one guy in the booth is responsible for deciding point of impact. Explains a lot.

Deciding point of impact using data collected from cameras capable of filming at 200 frames per second. Not just visually saying yep theres the impact. With some certainty, they can determine which frame the ball impacted the pad

 

[Plugger35]

I think we both know what I meant by my comment. I know it's fun to be devils advocate but you do tend to go on about us cheating and throwing shade at us constantly. One bloke bit back and went a bit overboard but essentially he had had enough. I don't blame him. Just my two cents but you have to own a bit of yesterday's outcome

Most of the cheating comments I make are tongue in cheek and not meant to be taken seriously, NZ and their players cop plenty of stick here too like being called sheep shaggers etc so it's not all one way traffic. I don't see the problem with that sort of banter anyway as long as it doesn't get personal.

 

[Wedge McManus]

Most of the cheating comments I make are tongue in cheek and not meant to be taken seriously, NZ and their players cop plenty of stick here too like being called sheep shaggers etc so it's not all one way traffic. I don't see the problem with that sort of banter anyway as long as it doesn't get personal.

The sheep shagger stuff should go I agree. It's stupid but so is us cheating. Warner was the cheat imo Smith and Bancroft stupid for not doing something about it. Maybe others knew about it but hopefully not. Tone down the cheap shots mate then you'd have a leg to stand on re the kiwi bashing

 

[DangerSloane]

Deciding point of impact using data collected from cameras capable of filming at 200 frames per second. Not just visually saying yep theres the impact. With some certainty, they can determine which frame the ball impacted the pad

Well in this case they got it wrong, clear as day.
I know they're using multiple images but when it all comes down to it yeh there is a guy going "yep there's the impact"

I know it wasnt a review going on during the backstage pass, but he paused that shot at least 2 or 3 frames after the impact is made.