SA Footy

Some like it, Most hate.
Personally, i think there's a place for it if it's implemented properly unlike it is now.

Just watching the ODI between the Windies and Pakistan and Darren Bravo is given Not Out after a caught behind appeal by the whole Pakistani team which means very little as usually as only about 1 in 10 of their appeals are close to being out. Pakistan immediately reviewed the decision. I was surprised that they dont use Hot Spot over there and therefore the decisopn has to be reversed going on the sound and sight of the 3rd umpire viewing the replay.
I was gobsmacked when the decision was overturned and given out based on a faint scratchy type sound as the ball was passing the bat. No deviation was evident.
I thought that for a decision to be overturned that there had to be definitive proof that the original decision was clearly wrong ? How can a faint scratchy sound with no ball deviation be clear proof that the original decision was wrong?
So here we have Hot Spot being used in some countries.
Hot Spot NOT being used in some countries.
DRS NOT being used in any games involving India.

The inconsistencies from country to country with the DRS is joke but what would one expect with the incompetent ICC supposedly in charge of the game.

similar result in the second test of the Ashes!

jackpot jim wrote:Some like it, Most hate.
Personally, i think there's a place for it if it's implemented properly unlike it is now.

Just watching the ODI between the Windies and Pakistan and Darren Bravo is given Not Out after a caught behind appeal by the whole Pakistani team which means very little as usually as only about 1 in 10 of their appeals are close to being out. Pakistan immediately reviewed the decision. I was surprised that they dont use Hot Spot over there and therefore the decisopn has to be reversed going on the sound and sight of the 3rd umpire viewing the replay.
I was gobsmacked when the decision was overturned and given out based on a faint scratchy type sound as the ball was passing the bat. No deviation was evident.
I thought that for a decision to be overturned that there had to be definitive proof that the original decision was clearly wrong ? How can a faint scratchy sound with no ball deviation be clear proof that the original decision was wrong?
So here we have Hot Spot being used in some countries.
Hot Spot NOT being used in some countries.
DRS NOT being used in any games involving India.

The inconsistencies from country to country with the DRS is joke but what would one expect with the incompetent ICC supposedly in charge of the game.

Is the ICC still housed in India?

DRS should only ever be in the Hands of the Umpires. Players should have nothing to do with what is and what is not reviewed. Problem solved and everyone is happy bar the Indians probably

heater31 wrote:DRS should only ever be in the Hands of the Umpires. Players should have nothing to do with what is and what is not reviewed. Problem solved and everyone is happy bar the Indians probably

Only problem with that is that it would become like the run outs and stumping a where the video review gets used for 99.9% of appeals regardless of how far in or out the batsmen is.

If the umpires were ever in charge there would be seriously no point having them out there and the third umpires just asses every ball

Sky Pilot wrote: Is the ICC still housed in India?

No

Dubai

whufc wrote:

heater31 wrote:DRS should only ever be in the Hands of the Umpires. Players should have nothing to do with what is and what is not reviewed. Problem solved and everyone is happy bar the Indians probably

Only problem with that is that it would become like the run outs and stumping a where the video review gets used for 99.9% of appeals regardless of how far in or out the batsmen is.

If the umpires were ever in charge there would be seriously no point having them out there and the third umpires just asses every ball

Is there any point in having them there when they cant get the simplest of decisions right - Aleem Dar and another howler

jackpot jim wrote:Some like it, Most hate.
Personally, i think there's a place for it if it's implemented properly unlike it is now.

Just watching the ODI between the Windies and Pakistan and Darren Bravo is given Not Out after a caught behind appeal by the whole Pakistani team which means very little as usually as only about 1 in 10 of their appeals are close to being out. Pakistan immediately reviewed the decision. I was surprised that they dont use Hot Spot over there and therefore the decisopn has to be reversed going on the sound and sight of the 3rd umpire viewing the replay.
I was gobsmacked when the decision was overturned and given out based on a faint scratchy type sound as the ball was passing the bat. No deviation was evident.
I thought that for a decision to be overturned that there had to be definitive proof that the original decision was clearly wrong ? How can a faint scratchy sound with no ball deviation be clear proof that the original decision was wrong?
So here we have Hot Spot being used in some countries.
Hot Spot NOT being used in some countries.
DRS NOT being used in any games involving India.

The inconsistencies from country to country with the DRS is joke but what would one expect with the incompetent ICC supposedly in charge of the game.

overall the biggest problem is the users of the system, not the system itself

whilst many people here dont agree, the lbw drs is very good as you know exactly what the outcome will be and how the decision is measured.

the problem with the edges is that there is no defined out/not out judgements, especially when hot spot isnt used/doesnt show something. it can come down to an opinion when there is no obvious defelction, which means the 3rd umpires thinks he knows better than the field umpire.

there is no way that the system should be in the hands of the umpire as then there will be checks for everything just in case.

but it shouldn't be in the hands of the players as they waste it.

jackpot jim wrote:Some like it, Most hate.
Personally, i think there's a place for it if it's implemented properly unlike it is now.

Just watching the ODI between the Windies and Pakistan and Darren Bravo is given Not Out after a caught behind appeal by the whole Pakistani team which means very little as usually as only about 1 in 10 of their appeals are close to being out. Pakistan immediately reviewed the decision. I was surprised that they dont use Hot Spot over there and therefore the decisopn has to be reversed going on the sound and sight of the 3rd umpire viewing the replay.
I was gobsmacked when the decision was overturned and given out based on a faint scratchy type sound as the ball was passing the bat. No deviation was evident.
I thought that for a decision to be overturned that there had to be definitive proof that the original decision was clearly wrong ? How can a faint scratchy sound with no ball deviation be clear proof that the original decision was wrong?
So here we have Hot Spot being used in some countries.
Hot Spot NOT being used in some countries.
DRS NOT being used in any games involving India.

The inconsistencies from country to country with the DRS is joke but what would one expect with the incompetent ICC supposedly in charge of the game.

As Jason Gillespie said on radio "it should be called the BCCICC"

the ICC is a farce, all they do is take it up the arse from the indians everyone knows that

stampy wrote:the ICC is a farce, all they do is take it up the arse from the indians everyone knows that

The Symonds/Singh incident being a classic example although a piss weak James Sutherland and CA didn't help.

Killing test cricket

FFS

Its not the technology its the corrupt pricks using it.
A blind man could see that wasnt out, the technology conclusively showed it not out but the third umpire went against technology

Piss it off now!

I salute the Indians. They've been right all along. Lets just deal with the umps decisions on the field.

Jim05 wrote:Its not the technology its the corrupt pricks using it.
A blind man could see that wasnt out, the technology conclusively showed it not out but the third umpire went against technology

Exactly right, DRS is fine, it's the idiot doing the review that needs to change

It's better than it was, but we need some guidelines to help keep it consistent. One game a noise is enough, this time it's not. One game no evidence leads to a decision overturned, this one it's not.

One change we could bring in is to take it from the players. I'm not sure the umpires in the middle are the right ones to take over either, we already see plenty of referrals with run outs, imagine if we referred the 100 or so other decisions there might be in a game.

Instead, we should have a someone or two sit in a booth able to call up hot spot, hawkeye, audio and general replays. With the time it usually takes to get the next ball done or for a player to walk off the ground, the guys in the booth have enough time to decide whether it needs to be looked at. All it needs it to alert the umpires in the middle who can then stop the play. Should keep the game moving and get more decisions right without batsmen worrying about wasting reviews or strategic reviews.

Two things for me:

1. Stop trying to make it an exact science (when often it will be inconclusive)
2. Re-instate "benefit of the doubt" to the batsman, which is traditionally in line with the principle of the game

wycbloods wrote:I salute the Indians. They've been right all along. Lets just deal with the umps decisions on the field.

Yep!!