Umpire Decision Referral

Discussion in 'Sports' started by Yusuf, Jun 25, 2011.

  1. Yusuf

    Yusuf GUARDIAN Administrator

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2009
    Messages:
    24,274
    Likes Received:
    11,283
    Location:
    BANGalore
    Hot topic this these days in cricket. Old powers want it, champions don't.

    India says it's not fool proof and also cost prohibitive as it costs $56,000 a day for hawk eye.

    That it's not entirely fool proof has been proved in the world cup as many a times hawk eye was limited by "least count" when it could not judge the ball track when the impact was beyond a certain distance. Add to that because there was no snicko, many edges were not heard during the world cup though the players were one hundred percent sure there was a nick and the tell tale sign of a batsman looking behind immediately.

    The debate is going to rage further now because of the howlers by Daryl Harper.

    For me you need better technology in terms of hawk eye having better ability assisted with hot spot and snickometer to be 100% sure of technology assisting on field umpires. And yes we need better on field umpires as well.
     
    A.V. likes this.
  2.  
  3. Illusive

    Illusive Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2010
    Messages:
    2,335
    Likes Received:
    1,418
    Hotspot is used in DRS in every bilateral series, it was only not used in worldcup. Snickometer is not reliable, hotspot is. BCCI should understand technology evolves with time and what is available now is pretty advanced.

    Hawkeye is also used in tennis to review the decision.

    I am not foolproof sure if cricket is going to survive if its administered like this.
     
    Energon likes this.
  4. Yusuf

    Yusuf GUARDIAN Administrator

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2009
    Messages:
    24,274
    Likes Received:
    11,283
    Location:
    BANGalore
    Hot spot is there only in series involving Oz and it's bit part of DRS.
     
  5. Energon

    Energon DFI stars Stars and Ambassadors

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2009
    Messages:
    1,199
    Likes Received:
    760
    This entire conflict showcases the BCCI's obstinate outlook on everything. The BCCI is far too short sighted to see that sport itself is a big driver in the improvement of technology and it is the responsibility of every sporting authority to support this function as much as possible.

    These situations only convince me how unfit the BCCI is to assume leadership.
     
    A.V. likes this.
  6. Yusuf

    Yusuf GUARDIAN Administrator

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2009
    Messages:
    24,274
    Likes Received:
    11,283
    Location:
    BANGalore
    I don't know mate. The success rate of lost teams taking DRS is pretty low except England lately. Players think they have got their man and the review says something else. So I think that has fueled the perception that DRS is not accurate. India has the worst strike rate as far as DRS goes. In the world cup we for about 4 right in 17 or 18 referrals.
     
  7. Rahul M

    Rahul M Regular Member

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2011
    Messages:
    224
    Likes Received:
    186
    nah yusuf that was before, our strike rate in WC was middling, better than half the test playing nations. the earlier sticking point was who was going to pay for hotspot, if ICC or someone else is paying I don't know why BCCI is opposing it now.
     
  8. Yusuf

    Yusuf GUARDIAN Administrator

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2009
    Messages:
    24,274
    Likes Received:
    11,283
    Location:
    BANGalore
    I don't think so. We got only 4 going our way. Let me see if there is any link on this.
     
  9. Yusuf

    Yusuf GUARDIAN Administrator

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2009
    Messages:
    24,274
    Likes Received:
    11,283
    Location:
    BANGalore
    Found this

    UDRS was used in a thrilling tie between India and England in Bangalore as MS Dhoni was annoyed by the system and said that it is an adulteration of human decision and technology, to which the ICC replied that the players should know the technology before passing judgement on it.[10] ICC later revised the guidelines of 2.5m rule. Pakistan used DRS successfully against Australia in their group A match. Australian captain Ricky Ponting edged a delivery from Mohammed Hafeez and the umpire ruled it not out. The DRS system reversed this decision. This was a critical turning point in the match. The Australia skipper admitted after the match that he had edged the ball, but said he stayed at the crease because he has never been a walker. "There were no doubts about the nick - I knew I hit it," Ponting said. "But as always, I wait for the umpire to give me out. That's the way I've always played the game." There has been a lot of criticism levelled at Ricky Ponting for his judgement and displaying poor sportsman spirit.
     
  10. Rahul M

    Rahul M Regular Member

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2011
    Messages:
    224
    Likes Received:
    186
  11. Yusuf

    Yusuf GUARDIAN Administrator

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2009
    Messages:
    24,274
    Likes Received:
    11,283
    Location:
    BANGalore
  12. Yusuf

    Yusuf GUARDIAN Administrator

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2009
    Messages:
    24,274
    Likes Received:
    11,283
    Location:
    BANGalore
    Well the point again being that the system is not fool proof. Pointing in the cup showed it was not and also showed his sportsman spirit.

    See the beat person to judge an LBW is the umpire and the wicket keeper. You cannot have a 25% success rate. Keepers have the best view and also judge the angle of the ball heading towards them. So many times, the ball looks to be heading towards the stumps to the naked eye, but the hawk eye says going down leg or over the stumps.

    I am all for technology. But l don't think that this tech is good enough yet.
     
  13. Rahul M

    Rahul M Regular Member

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2011
    Messages:
    224
    Likes Received:
    186
    25% is quite good actually.
     
  14. Energon

    Energon DFI stars Stars and Ambassadors

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2009
    Messages:
    1,199
    Likes Received:
    760
    But neither are umpiring calls. The best feature of sport is that there will always be that fine line of uncertainty. But in the mean time all good technologies have to be promoted and that is the only way they get better.

    And most of all the costs are definitely not prohibitive for the BCCI.
     
    Last edited: Jun 26, 2011
  15. Yusuf

    Yusuf GUARDIAN Administrator

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2009
    Messages:
    24,274
    Likes Received:
    11,283
    Location:
    BANGalore
    Consider Simon Taufel and Aleem Dar. Brilliant umpires. We need more of such umpires. The game goes on faster. We dont need UDRS if we have such umpires. That rare mistake by them could be taken in the stride.

    I got pissed with the system during the India England game when a clear case of the batsman being out was given not out because hawk eye left that decision to on field umpires.
     
  16. Daredevil

    Daredevil On Vacation! Administrator

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2009
    Messages:
    11,613
    Likes Received:
    5,670
    Here is another view about why UDRS is not required. Some valid points there.

     
  17. Yusuf

    Yusuf GUARDIAN Administrator

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2009
    Messages:
    24,274
    Likes Received:
    11,283
    Location:
    BANGalore
    DD, it just seconds what I said in my last post. Better umpires are needed than hawk eye.
     
  18. A.V.

    A.V. New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2009
    Messages:
    6,503
    Likes Received:
    1,106
    Location:
    Moscow, russia
    BCCI relents on DRS, but puts its own spin

    Abandoning its rigid stand on technology, the BCCI today agreed to the mandatory use of the controversial Decision Review System in a modified version in all international matches at the ongoing ICC Annual Conference. The modified version would have Hot-Spot technology but without the Hawk Eye ball

    BCCI relents on DRS, but puts its own spin - Hindustan Times


    -tracker, which would mean that the LBW decisions would not be within the purview of the DRS. The mandatory terms and conditions for the DRS that have now been recommended by ICC's chief executives' committee to the Executive Board for approval tomorrow will now consist of "thermal imaging" and "sound technology". It has been agreed to remove the "ball tracker" from the ICC's original compulsory list of DRS technologies.
     
  19. Yusuf

    Yusuf GUARDIAN Administrator

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2009
    Messages:
    24,274
    Likes Received:
    11,283
    Location:
    BANGalore
    Good enough. A lot of inside edges and faint edges go to the batsmen and without the hot spot and snicko we saw in the world cup that UDRS didn't give any conclusive evidence about the batsman being out though he was out in all probability (eg Ricky Ponting who later said he was out but would not walk).

    The hawk eye is still not fool proof and should be adopted when it is perfected.
     
  20. Oracle

    Oracle New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2010
    Messages:
    8,120
    Likes Received:
    1,541
    Location:
    Bangalore, India
    Benefit of doubt is always given to the batsmen.
     
  21. Yusuf

    Yusuf GUARDIAN Administrator

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2009
    Messages:
    24,274
    Likes Received:
    11,283
    Location:
    BANGalore
    Yes it is. It has been a batsmens game. Bowlers need respite. But it cannot be blind in terms of using imperfect technology. Hot spot is good. Hawk eye is not.
     

Share This Page