Cricket Thread: Aus vs Bangladesh test series... just 4 months away

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

 

[Eagleboy2011]

It would be a nice drive.
By the time he reaches Brisbane, the players would have moved onto Adelaide.

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

It would be a nice drive.
By the time he reaches Brisbane, the players would have moved onto Adelaide.

Go for it lol!

 

[Eagleboy2011]

 

[Scorpus]

I note what you said earlier, about there being a 1-frame tolerance for the audio/video synch. In Smith's case though, the "spike" showed up 2-3 frames after the ball had passed the bat - outside the 1-frame tolerance range.

Having said that, players know that they will be gone any time an edge shows up on snicko, which is why Smith walked once he saw it on the video screen. It's not the same as Brook, who walked as soon as the Aussies reviewed the original not-out decision. Brook didn't even wait for the video umpire to review.

I'm still not convinced the "spike" on Smith's snicko was actually the result of contact between bat & ball, given how late it was and how small the spike was.

The 1 frame tolerance is not due to audio/video synchronization.

It's due to the fact the audio signal is captured over a longer period of time than the video signal.

The snicko audio capture includes everything captured between video frames, due to the much lower sample rate of the cameras compared to the microphone. So a decision has to be made about when the start and end points for the audio sample occur.

The DRS system basically says the audio sample covers everything that happened up to the currently displayed frame. So there is 1 frame of tolerance to say 'well this event might have happened up to 1 frame prior to the currently displayed image'. That's why when the ball has already passed the bat in the image, but the audio shows a spike, it's deemed to be given out on the assumption the contact occurred between frames.

In the Smith footage it was inconclusive whether the contact occurred at the instant of the prior frame, or at some point between that frame and the 'ball is past the bat now' frame when the spike was displayed in the audio signal. So it has to be given out.

 

[BRL121]

The 1 frame tolerance is not due to audio/video synchronization.

It's due to the fact the audio signal is captured over a longer period of time than the video signal.

The snicko audio capture includes everything captured between video frames, due to the much lower sample rate of the cameras compared to the microphone. So a decision has to be made about when the start and end points for the audio sample occur.

The DRS system basically says the audio sample covers everything that happened up to the currently displayed frame. So there is 1 frame of tolerance to say 'well this event might have happened up to 1 frame prior to the currently displayed image'. That's why when the ball has already passed the bat in the image, but the audio shows a spike, it's deemed to be given out on the assumption the contact occurred between frames.

In the Smith footage it was inconclusive whether the contact occurred at the instant of the prior frame, or at some point between that frame and the 'ball is past the bat now' frame when the spike was displayed in the audio signal. So it has to be given out.

You musn't forget the difference between the velocity of light and that of sound. In the time taken for the sound generated by a nick around 1.5m away from the mic, ~1/200s, the ball, travelling at around 30m/s, will have moved around 15mm past. That seems not inconsistent with the observations in this case. They should really pre-correct for this, though.
By the way, I wouldn't call this one a "spike". It was more a prolonged scrape across the flat edge of the bat, IMO.

 

[Vader]

You musn't forget the difference between the velocity of light and that of sound. In the time taken for the sound generated by a nick around 1.5m away from the mic, ~1/200s, the ball, travelling at around 30m/s, will have moved around 15mm past. That seems not inconsistent with the observations in this case. They should really pre-correct for this, though.
By the way, I wouldn't call this one a "spike". It was more a prolonged scrape across the flat edge of the bat, IMO.

It was a very small "spike" (though I wouldn't argue with your description of a "scrape"). The important thing for me is that it was 2-3 frames after the ball passed the bat, well outside the 1-frame tolerance. It really doesn't matter what causes the 1-frame tolerance - what matters to me is that the spike WASN'T inside the 1-frame tolerance. Given the lateness of the "spike" the cause of the 1-frame tolerance is rendered moot.

 

[BRL121]

It was a very small "spike" (though I wouldn't argue with your description of a "scrape"). The important thing for me is that it was 2-3 frames after the ball passed the bat, well outside the 1-frame tolerance. It really doesn't matter what causes the 1-frame tolerance - what matters to me is that the spike WASN'T inside the 1-frame tolerance. Given the lateness of the "spike" the cause of the 1-frame tolerance is rendered moot.

You keep saying that, but I can't recall anything but a one-frame difference. In the repeated to-ing and fro-ing, the ball was behind the bat with no audio in one frame, and a ball-width past the bat with a full audio "spike" in the next one.

 

[spenze]

What are the odds on Starc getting ten wickets for the match in Brisbane?

Only weather would be ballsing up that chance, if he gets twenty overs in the match you'd pretty much call it, humid weather, under lights, pink ball, that's not a set of conditions that Starcy detests

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

What are the odds on Starc getting ten wickets for the match in Brisbane?

Only weather would be ballsing up that chance, if he gets twenty overs in the match you'd pretty much call it, humid weather, under lights, pink ball, that's not a set of conditions that Starcy detests

Cummins likely back actually harms his chances... but a decent chance you would think.

Surely we bring Cummins in for Lyon. Head & Labuschagne can always bowl some part time spin.

Khawaja should also go, but his defence team habe been out in force in the media.

 

[Vader]

Cummins likely back actually harms his chances... but a decent chance you would think.

Surely we bring Cummins in for Lyon. Head & Labuschagne can always bowl some part time spin.

Khawaja should also go, but his defence team habe been out in force in the media.

Even worse... some are campaigning for the Return of the WoaT!

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

Even worse... some are campaigning for the Return of the WoaT!

Fortunately that isn't happening as we already have a spare better performed all-rounder.

Actually Marsh isn't even an all-rounder these days as doesn't bowl. He can stick to white ball.

 

[Vader]

Fortunately that isn't happening as we already have a spare better performed all-rounder.

Actually Marsh isn't even an all-rounder these days as doesn't bowl. He can stick to white ball.

More than happy to see him playing white ball cricket for Australia. He has an excellent record in both T20I and ODI formats.

However, I never want to see the WOAT dressed in white and playing with a red ball for Australia ever again.

 

[Vader]

Selectors have gone with an unchanged team for the Brisbane test. Personally, I think this shows an astounding degree of arrogance, expecting to beat the Poms with only 10 players, and effectively forcing Labuschagne to open the batting again (an experiment which failed miserably in Perth).

I can understand them not picking Cummins, who was long odds to have regained enough fitness anyway. Picking Khawaja, who can no longer bat or field, is truly staggering.

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

Apparently Khawaja had a hit yesterday and was striking them well

Irons and woods

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

Selectors have gone with an unchanged team for the Brisbane test. Personally, I think this shows an astounding degree of arrogance, expecting to beat the Poms with only 10 players, and effectively forcing Labuschagne to open the batting again (an experiment which failed miserably in Perth).

I can understand them not picking Cummins, who was long odds to have regained enough fitness anyway. Picking Khawaja, who can no longer bat or field, is truly staggering.

I'm then tempted to let you have your way & open with Head & play Webster. Inglis would be a better option than Khawaja.

Neser should come in for Lyon.

 

[GreyCrow]

Selectors have gone with an unchanged team for the Brisbane test. Personally, I think this shows an astounding degree of arrogance, expecting to beat the Poms with only 10 players, and effectively forcing Labuschagne to open the batting again (an experiment which failed miserably in Perth).

I can understand them not picking Cummins, who was long odds to have regained enough fitness anyway. Picking Khawaja, who can no longer bat or field, is truly staggering.

The Crows Way

 

[spenze]

I'm then tempted to let you have your way & open with Head & play Webster. Inglis would be a better option than Khawaja.

Neser should come in for Lyon.

Neser would have been an excellent addition

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

Neser would have been an excellent addition

More suited to pink ball than Lyon.

 

[Thrillthorpe7]

It would be a nice drive.
By the time he reaches Brisbane, the players would have moved onto Adelaide.

Wood played a couple of seasons of club cricket in Queensland, he knows where it is. Quite confident this was meant as a joke and Fox saw the chance for a clickbait headline.

 

[Thrillthorpe7]

Selectors have gone with an unchanged team for the Brisbane test. Personally, I think this shows an astounding degree of arrogance, expecting to beat the Poms with only 10 players, and effectively forcing Labuschagne to open the batting again (an experiment which failed miserably in Perth).

I can understand them not picking Cummins, who was long odds to have regained enough fitness anyway. Picking Khawaja, who can no longer bat or field, is truly staggering.

It's an unchanged squad, not team. Highly doubt they've made their mind up about the final team a week out.

 

[Vader]

It's an unchanged squad, not team. Highly doubt they've made their mind up about the final team a week out.

Thank-you for this very important correction. One can only hope that they will see sense and call time on Khawaja's career, rather than going into the game with 10 players.

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

Thank-you for this very important correction. One can only hope that they will see sense and call time on Khawaja's career, rather than going into the game with 10 players.

Reckon a better balanced pink ball line-up...

1 Weatherald
2 Head
3 Labuschagne
4 Smith
5 Green
6 Webster
7 Carey
8 Nesser
9 Starc
10 Doggett
11 Boland

 

[Vader]

Reckon a better balanced pink ball line-up...

1 Weatherald
2 Head
3 Labuschagne
4 Smith
5 Green
6 Webster
7 Carey
8 Nesser
9 Starc
10 Doggett
11 Boland

I would be more than happy with that team.

 

[Mostyn]

Reckon a better balanced pink ball line-up...

1 Weatherald
2 Head
3 Labuschagne
4 Smith
5 Green
6 Webster
7 Carey
8 Nesser
9 Starc
10 Doggett
11 Boland

I think Neser would be very dangerous with the pink ball on his home ground. Adds a bit of batting too