No ball checking with no DRS

[Public Enemy No1]

Let me simplify the this for some posters

Decision was correct

The consistency and hypocrisy is appalling

Do you understand yet ?

 

[manureid]

Re: Boxing Day Test: Australia v India @ MCG (Mon - Fri) *Part 2*

Just another reason why Cricket in general is going to shit. Farcical really. Selective replay assistant. How to turn world cricket into a joke 101 by the I(ndian)CC.

 

[roostersgal4eva]

Re: Boxing Day Test: Australia v India @ MCG (Mon - Fri) *Part 2*

what are you talking about? you are assuming that the umpire's option to seek guidance from the 3rd umpire is part of the wider DRS. stop confusing the two, they are completely different.

no one has 'picked or chosen'. not india. not the bcci. in any game, tests or ODIs, the on field umpires can ask for the 3rd umpires clarification regardless of whether DRS is used or not. i.e, whether the ball touched the rope as a fielder slides in to save a boundary etc etc

stop whinging people. save your meltdowns

So why can they do that and blantently refuse DRS????

You think I'm missing the point....

 

[Baby_Jenks]

Re: Boxing Day Test: Australia v India @ MCG (Mon - Fri) *Part 2*

DRS = DECISION review system. Has nothing to do with run outs, no balls, close catches because no decision has been made.

Just argueing for the sake of it, however ...

The ball hits the bat, or the ball doesn't hit that bat. There's two options and no room for opinion. Ergo Husseys decision yesterday shout have fallen within the purview of the "noball checking rule".

 

[Mr Meeseeks]

Opposing opinion = devils advocate?

I present my opinion and my reasoning. Others disagree. Just as others disagree with your opinion. If you struggle with that concept I'd suggest internet forums aren't for you.

Mate most people will look back in a few days and agree with your stance.

Right now though people are angry and irritated, and yr just winding them up.

You are clearly either a troll or a w***er with zero self awareness.

 

[Umpa Lumpa]

Re: Boxing Day Test: Australia v India @ MCG (Mon - Fri) *Part 2*

Mate most people will look back in a few days and agree with your stance.

Right now though people are angry and irritated, and yr just winding them up.

You are clearly either a troll or a w***er with zero self awareness.

or maybe he is just being logical??

 

[ManWithNoName]

Re: Boxing Day Test: Australia v India @ MCG (Mon - Fri) *Part 2*

Mate most people will look back in a few days and agree with your stance.

Right now though people are angry and irritated, and yr just winding them up.

You are clearly either a troll or a w***er with zero self awareness.

Or someone rational enough not to change my opinion due to emotional outbursts?

One of the dumbest things I've ever read.

 

[mike14]

Re: Boxing Day Test: Australia v India @ MCG (Mon - Fri) *Part 2*

Mate most people will look back in a few days and agree with your stance.

Right now though people are angry and irritated, and yr just winding them up.

You are clearly either a troll or a w***er with zero self awareness.

Doubt it, most people will probably think that you either use technology or you don't, and that picking and choosing is a pretty stupid way to go about it

 

[Donkeyman]

Re: Boxing Day Test: Australia v India @ MCG (Mon - Fri) *Part 2*

No its the umpires not making a decision yet again

How many no balls go not called in a day?

Exactly. Say they check every ball, Siddle gets called 5 or 6 times, moves his marker back, and bowls Dravid with a legal delivery.

 

[Mr Meeseeks]

Or someone rational enough not to change my opinion due to emotional outbursts?

One of the dumbest things I've ever read.

You cant figure out why you are pissing people off???

 

[roostersgal4eva]

Re: Boxing Day Test: Australia v India @ MCG (Mon - Fri) *Part 2*

Thank you Capt Obvious.

For those who don't seem to/or want to grasp the simple:

The decision is not the problem, it was the correct one. The issue lies in using technology for one instance when an umpire is unsure, and not using it in another.

It's got nothing to do with the Indians (well, indirectly the BCCI), or how Siddle should just keep his foot behind the line. It's an issue with what seems to be a crazy set of standards that shouldn't have been allowed to leave the ICC meeting.

Of course but you are missing the point...

The argument here is that we use one part of technology when another has been refused

ICC should have the balls to say either a) DRS will be used in all test matches or b) it will NOT be used in all test matches rather than bowing to the whim of one test team

 

[Mr Meeseeks]

or maybe he is just being logical??

Time and a place.... This is the perfect time.... If one is troll...

 

[ManWithNoName]

Re: Boxing Day Test: Australia v India @ MCG (Mon - Fri) *Part 2*

You cant figure out why you are pissing people off???

I can. And I really don't care. I'm looking at it rationally and logically and I'm posting my opinion as a result of that. I'm not here to make others happy. I'm here to give my opinion. As we're all meant to be.

 

[roostersgal4eva]

Re: Boxing Day Test: Australia v India @ MCG (Mon - Fri) *Part 2*

doubt it, most people will probably think that you either use technology or you don't, and that picking and choosing is a pretty stupid way to go about it

thankyou!

 

[Mr Meeseeks]

I can. And I really don't care

Sorry for labelling you as a troll..

You appear to just be a w***er. Or a kiwi?

 

[fairdinkum]

Re: Boxing Day Test: Australia v India @ MCG (Mon - Fri) *Part 2*

BF Posters: I'm not anti India, I just want the RIGHT DECISION! IT'S ALL ABOUT THE RIGHT DECISION!
*No ball gets checked and wicket overturned*
BF Posters: Corruption! Evil! How dare they get the right decision!

As you are against the use of technology to determine whether or not batsmen should be out in cases like Hussey's dismissal yesterday, can you please explain why you are in favour of the use of technology to determine whether or not batsmen are out in cases like Dravid today?

a no ball isn't part of the decision as to whether it's out or not

I believe you aren't trolling, but you make it hard to continue believing that, sometimes.

 

[mike14]

Re: Boxing Day Test: Australia v India @ MCG (Mon - Fri) *Part 2*

Of course but you are missing the point...

The argument here is that we use one part of technology when another has been refused

ICC should have the balls to say either a) DRS will be used in all test matches or b) it will NOT be used in all test matches rather than bowing to the whim of one test team

I'm agreeing with you (I think), how did I miss the point?

 

[ManWithNoName]

Re: Boxing Day Test: Australia v India @ MCG (Mon - Fri) *Part 2*

As you are against the use of technology to determine whether or not batsmen should be out in cases like Hussey's dismissal yesterday, can you please explain why you are in favour of the use of technology to determine whether or not batsmen are out in cases like Dravid today?



I believe you aren't trolling, but you make it hard to continue believing that, sometimes.

The second part of that quote wasn't my logic. That was me assuming what the ICC's logic was. Nice editing of my post...

And the first part: I'm okay with checking no balls as I believe the 3rd Umpire should do that full time. And I'm okay with TV replays checking for edges and stuff. But I loathe DRS because a) it undermines umpires and b) decisions being made based on hotspot and hawkeye is a joke.

 

[mattymac]

Re: Boxing Day Test: Australia v India @ MCG (Mon - Fri) *Part 2*

Opposing opinion = devils advocate?

I present my opinion and my reasoning. Others disagree. Just as others disagree with your opinion. If you struggle with that concept I'd suggest internet forums aren't for you.

haha i wasn't even talking about you ya drama queen. freudian slip on your behalf?

 

[ManWithNoName]

Re: Boxing Day Test: Australia v India @ MCG (Mon - Fri) *Part 2*

haha i wasn't even talking about you ya drama queen. freudian slip on your behalf?

Yet you quoted me? Who else was I assume you were talking about?

 

[fairdinkum]

Re: Boxing Day Test: Australia v India @ MCG (Mon - Fri) *Part 2*

The second part of that quote wasn't my logic. That was me assuming what the ICC's logic was. Nice editing of my post...

Um... those were your exact words, bro. You claimed that a no ball is not part of whether a batsman is out or not. Laughable.

And the first part: I'm okay with checking no balls as I believe the 3rd Umpire should do that full time.

I asked you to explain why you are for one and not the other. Y'know, explain the contradiction.

And I'm okay with TV replays checking for edges and stuff.

So you don't even support the current system but you are in here defending it and criticising the posters in here criticisng the current system.

Perhaps you are an attention whore after all.

I loathe DRS because a) it undermines umpires

How much respect do you reckon Erasmus has after the Siddle no ball decision? From players and public alike?

and b) decisions being made based on hotspot and hawkeye is a joke.

You don't think there are instances where hotspot does in fact prove conclusive mistakes by the umpires?

 

[ManWithNoName]

Re: Boxing Day Test: Australia v India @ MCG (Mon - Fri) *Part 2*

Um... those were your exact words, bro. You claimed that a no ball is not part of whether a batsman is out or not. Laughable.

Read my post "bro". "I'm assuming this is the ICC's logic".

I asked you to explain why you are for one and not the other. Y'know, explain the contradiction.

And I did. The undermining of umpires by having players question decisions, and my dislike/distrust in hawkeye/hot spot. Neither are an issue when the umpire himself reviews something like a no ball. That pretty much exactly answered your question.

So you don't even support the current system but you are in here defending it and criticising the posters in here criticisng the current system.

Perhaps you are an attention whore after all.

Rightio then.

How much respect do you reckon Erasmus has after the Siddle no ball decision? From players and public alike?

About the same as pretty much every other ICC umpire in the world. Pretty much all of them have done it.

You don't think there are instances where hotspot does in fact prove conclusive mistakes by the umpires?

It does. But I don't trust it, and as mentioned before, don't like it for reasons stated above.

Perhaps this time you can respond without the personal abuse, hmm?

 

[mattymac]

Re: Boxing Day Test: Australia v India @ MCG (Mon - Fri) *Part 2*

Yet you quoted me? Who else was I assume you were talking about?

yeah nah i didn't dude.

but yes i do think you get a hard on getting people to bite by constantly playing devil's advocate, which is fine if thats how you choose to spend your time. its also why i generally ignore your posts nowadays so lets just agree to ignore eachother hey?

 

[fairdinkum]

Re: Boxing Day Test: Australia v India @ MCG (Mon - Fri) *Part 2*

Read my post "bro". "I'm assuming this is the ICC's logic".

So when the logical inconsistency is pointed out, you hide behind 'nah I dont really believe this, I'm just playing devils advocate'.

Pathetic.

And I did.

No you didn't. You explained why you don't like players being able to appeal umpires' decisions. That is only one aspect of the UDRS and is not a valid reason to be against the use of technology such as hotspot (or even just simple replays for caught behinds etc) at large.

About the same as pretty much every other ICC umpire in the world. Pretty much all of them have done it.

Don't be a girl and run away. Answer the question. Do you reckon the players and crowds respect for Erasmus increased or decreased asa result of the Dravid/Siddle no-ball incident? Honestly?

 

[ManWithNoName]

Re: Boxing Day Test: Australia v India @ MCG (Mon - Fri) *Part 2*

yeah nah i didn't dude.

but yes i do think you get a hard on getting people to bite by constantly playing devil's advocate, which is fine if thats how you choose to spend your time. its also why i generally ignore your posts nowadays so lets just agree to ignore eachother hey?

No you didn't. Carry on.