Cricket Thread: There's no cricket on for months

Remove this Banner Ad

Our catching is the other embarrassing part. Why on earth is Cummins and or Starc not bowling also????
Probably the main difference in changing the result.

Gutsy by Pakistan though.
 
Probably the main difference in changing the result.

Gutsy by Pakistan though.
Indeed. If Smith had taken the easy catch to make it 3 for not very many, the result would have been completely different.

What I didn't understand at all was the appeal result for Swepson's LBW. Is there some actual rule that you can't be out if you are a certain distance down the pitch? How ridiculous, given ball tracking.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

What I didn't understand at all was the appeal result for Swepson's LBW. Is there some actual rule that you can't be out if you are a certain distance down the pitch? How ridiculous, given ball tracking.

See: https://icc-static-files.s3.amazona...Playing-Conditions-2017-Code-FINAL-051017.pdf

3.4.6.4 Where a Not out decision is being reviewed, the ball-tracking technology must report that the ball was Hitting for the batsman to be eligible to be given Out, otherwise the batsman shall remain Not out.
However, where the evidence shows that the ball was Hitting, the point of first interception was In Line, and the ball pitched In Line or Outside Off, but that:
• The point of first interception was 300cm or more from the stumps; or
• The point of first interception was more than 250cm but less than 300cm from the stumps and the distance between the point of pitching and the point of first interception was less than 40cm,
the on-field decision shall stand (that is, Not out)

From a software POV, Ball Tracking works by creating a model of how the ball moves, and then using that model to determine where the ball was likely to go if it hadn't hit the pad. As the ball gets closer to the stumps before being deflected, the model has more confidence about what and where it's going to hit.

I don't have access to the model or any of their data, but it's likely that the confidence at ~3m down the pitch falls below some acceptable level, and so that's what they've chosen to set as the distance in the ICC Test Match Playing Conditions.
 
Indeed. If Smith had taken the easy catch to make it 3 for not very many, the result would have been completely different.

What I didn't understand at all was the appeal result for Swepson's LBW. Is there some actual rule that you can't be out if you are a certain distance down the pitch? How ridiculous, given ball tracking.
I don't think there's any law about not being given out if you're a long way down the track.

However, I do believe there's a rule that DRS can't be used when the batsman is so far down the track, due to the increased uncertainty of ball tracking when the ball still has so far to travel.
 
You know who you sound like?
I do, and I feel dirty.

Had a very good Test this time round, which is pleasing. Unlike said person, I'll happily admit I was wrong if he's still there in 2 years time.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Cricket Thread: There's no cricket on for months

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top