India gonna use DRS v. England

[DT_fanatic]

Hit the toe in front of middle, out every day of the week, no batsman should survive that

You left out the fact that it was swinging a mile... most umpires would be justified in giving that not out on that basis. Every day of the week.

Hawkeye is awful at predicting how the ball is going to behave at impact unless the ball is traveling in a straight line.

 

[DT_fanatic]

DRS has a way to go for sure but when the alternative is our current crop of elite umpires getting a split second to make a decision that must stand then DRS is the easy winner.

Use it for edges - snicko works brilliantly for that. Leave the predictive stuff out of it.

 

[frankrizzo]

And then when hawkeye shows one to be hitting middle of middle when it was given not out we get to hear people whinging about it for the next few years and saying why can't they overturn that it was bloody plumb?

 

[DT_fanatic]

And then when hawkeye shows one to be hitting middle of middle when it was given not out we get to hear people whinging about it for the next few years and saying why can't they overturn that it was bloody plumb?

Yep, I'd rather avoid using imperfect technology if it's there just to overturn the 1 in 10 (if not more) tests chance of overturning a howler such as what you have described. Oh and aren't a lot of people whinging about the Marsh dismissal? There has also been a lot of whinging about other DRS dismissals as well, so it's not like the system is preventing the whinging.

Atleast this way we won't have tests ending contingent on a review undertaken by a tailender hopeful of surviving an LBW dismissal. That happens way more often and is a shithouse way to end a test match. Let's not even get started on all the other pitfalls of the system.

 

[Blue1980]

Yep, I'd rather avoid using imperfect technology if it's there just to overturn the 1 in 10 (if not more) tests chance of overturning a howler such as what you have described. Oh and aren't a lot of people whinging about the Marsh dismissal? There has also been a lot of whinging about other DRS dismissals as well, so it's not like the system is preventing the whinging.

Atleast this way we won't have tests ending contingent on a review undertaken by a tailender hopeful of surviving an LBW dismissal. That happens way more often and is a shithouse way to end a test match. Let's not even get started on all the other pitfalls of the system.

Are we getting more correct decisions now than without DRS? Yes.

As this is the case DRS is a good thing, this 100% or nothing argument is really nonsensical.

 

[frankrizzo]

so it's not like the system is preventing the whinging.

Once in a while we get a game like this where drs leaves people scratching their heads, pre drs all we heard was whinging about the umps.

 

[blackcat]

Are we getting more correct decisions now than without DRS? Yes.

As this is the case DRS is a good thing, this 100% or nothing argument is really nonsensical.

it is not just this. It is not "dont let the good be the enemy of the perfect(100% DRS decisions)".

it is how technology and referrals have changed the pattern and flow of the game. it is now staccato.

It interrupts the game.

Like in AFL goal decisions. I dont give a fuck about Tom Hawkins decision in the grand final. the ball is oval. sport is random. athletes and sportsmen and footballers and cricketers make errors. allow an umpire to make an error, if he makes too many, drop the umpire into the second division innit.

Technology interrupts the game and affects a viewers pleasure. It needed some wise CEO's and Chairpeople to adequately canvas and explain this. Yes, technology could take out a few howlers. Just like Trav Clokes kicking. But inserting technology means a FARRR greater loss than a few howlers.

Blue1980 your true concern should be the trade-off with the few howler decisions v the natural flow of the game. You can argue, that the game will find a new equilibrium and natural flow. bullshit. it will be staccato.

 

[blackcat]

Once in a while we get a game like this where drs leaves people scratching their heads, pre drs all we heard was whinging about the umps.

hyperbole.

if it was not whinging about umps, it would be whinging about Siddle, or whinging about Langer...

 

[blackcat]

How fast are the frame rates now?
During the 2011 World Cup, the frame rate of Hawk-Eye's cameras was 50 to 75 frames per second. Hawk-Eye's ultra-motion cameras recorded images at a faster rate in 2013, and their current ball-tracking cameras record images at 340 frames per second.

Thats pretty interesting to see the massive improvement in accuracy of Hawkeye compared to 5 years ago.

the algorithm still wont be perfect. like when an aircraft jet flies through a turblunence(noun), turbulent section of air, speak to golfball designers about aerodynamics and applied physics. You aint drawing a linear or curved line when the vessel hits this disrupted airflow. or air.

And if you see an outswinger, the ball moves first, but then it (usually) continues on the straighter line through to the keeper.

The algorithm and archive of input deliveries would need to be millions under all conditions, to get a better result with the technology.

 

[Blue1980]

it is not just this. It is not "dont let the good be the enemy of the perfect(100% DRS decisions)".

it is how technology and referrals have changed the pattern and flow of the game. it is now staccato.

It interrupts the game.

Like in AFL goal decisions. I dont give a fuck about Tom Hawkins decision in the grand final. the ball is oval. sport is random. athletes and sportsmen and footballers and cricketers make errors. allow an umpire to make an error, if he makes too many, drop the umpire into the second division innit.

Technology interrupts the game and affects a viewers pleasure. It needed some wise CEO's and Chairpeople to adequately canvas and explain this. Yes, technology could take out a few howlers. Just like Trav Clokes kicking. But inserting technology means a FARRR greater loss than a few howlers.

Blue1980 your true concern should be the trade-off with the few howler decisions v the natural flow of the game. You can argue, that the game will find a new equilibrium and natural flow. bullshit. it will be staccato.

My viewing pleasure is more interrupted by shitty decisions which could be overturned but aren't due to a caveman fear of technology

 

[Gavin Excell]

Upon learning that it may take too long for the equipment to arrive in India, the BCCI has decided to go ahead with DRS without HotSpot against England

http://www.espncricinfo.com/india-v-england-2016-17/content/story/1063742.html

The presence of UltraEdge, however, should help make sure DRS deliberations are as accurate as possible. The technology is used to determine exactly when and what part of the bat or batsman the ball has struck, and its use was a contributing factor in convincing the BCCI to use DRS. "UltraEdge also ensures that post-impact balls do not affect the predicted path or impact point and hence the accuracy has been improved," the board had said last week.

UltraEdge will now be used in detection of edges on caught-behind dismissals and bat-pad catches, and to determine whether a batsman had hit the ball in lbw scenarios.

Ultra edge - ha ha

 

[blackcat]

My viewing pleasure is more interrupted by shitty decisions which could be overturned but aren't due to a caveman fear of technology

but those howler decisions are about once a season

 

[DT_fanatic]

Are we getting more correct decisions now than without DRS? Yes.

As this is the case DRS is a good thing, this 100% or nothing argument is really nonsensical.

There is no proof to conclusively state that all Hawkeye based decisions are correct decisions.

 

[Blue1980]

There is no proof to conclusively state that all Hawkeye based decisions are correct decisions.

I dare say it's better than relying on the naked eye

 

[DT_fanatic]

I dare say it's better than relying on the naked eye

Happy to go with the naked eye. The tech isn't anywhere near where it's supposed to be where it can replicate human judgment. The only benefit of technology to LBWs is the second look. They'd probably make more correct decisions if they just looked at slow-mo replays.

 

[Carlos Danger]

Yep, I'd rather avoid using imperfect technology if it's there just to overturn the 1 in 10 (if not more) tests chance of overturning a howler such as what you have described. Oh and aren't a lot of people whinging about the Marsh dismissal? There has also been a lot of whinging about other DRS dismissals as well, so it's not like the system is preventing the whinging.

Atleast this way we won't have tests ending contingent on a review undertaken by a tailender hopeful of surviving an LBW dismissal. That happens way more often and is a shithouse way to end a test match. Let's not even get started on all the other pitfalls of the system.

Agree in part, i like DRS but there are way too many speculative reviews, like end of innings or in the 78th over before they get refreshed.

They should have a set number for the match 6 -8 use them all on day 1 if you want.

Result would be less reviews, they would only use when sure of a bad decision, not just a 50/50. Also would eliminate the issue we sometimes get when 2 reviews are used & teams cop a shocking decision.

 

[Adelaide Hawk]

Happy to go with the naked eye. The tech isn't anywhere near where it's supposed to be where it can replicate human judgment. The only benefit of technology to LBWs is the second look. They'd probably make more correct decisions if they just looked at slow-mo replays.

I don't trust ball tracking at all. Seen too many that are just wrong.

BTW, I'm still having a laugh at an LBW Virat Kohli reviewed when the ball wouldn't have hit a second set of stumps. I guess it will take the Indians some time to get used to it.

 

[Illinois Nazi]

India's players don't have the temperament to use DRS properly. Every time a decision goes against them they take it as a personal affront and burn a review trying to salvage their pride.