Jump to content

MCcricket

Members
  • Content count

    4,745
  • Runs

    79,710 
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1
  • Time Online

    22d 7h 7m 8s

Posts posted by MCcricket


  1. 1 hour ago, sarchasm said:

    Takes skill to come up with that amount of bullshit in one post.

     

    "stronger than average indians"

     

    "belonged to minority community so MCA wouldn't pick them"

     

    Is it now okay on this forum to make casual, baseless allegations without any worry for consequences?

    I have my Grandfather who has playex pentangular, my uncles have played Ranji trophy, my dad was big in cricket scene in Bombay, know quite well how MCA operates, even Zak was not selected by Bombay n had to play for Baroda, when they has useless Trundlers plying their trade for Bombay.

    In past Maharajahs n people from affluent n influential or upper class could represent India, rarely guys from lower class or minority could.


  2. 57 minutes ago, Rightarmfast said:

    @MCcricket be ready for an fir against you... You made baseless 'allegations'FOR bihari players :phehe:

    I don't care I'm not from Bihar ,but have to say what is, does Bihar have a recognized Ranji team, when was the last time  they played Ranji trophy, are they part of India, it's accepted guys from South in general smaller n smarter then ave Indians, guys from North Punjab, U.p Bihar stronger n bigger, a guy from  Punjab or Delhi is easily identifiable, Maharasthrians in general diminutive n weaker,  nepotism exist in India big time race, religion cast, dalit, Brahmin everyone knows it, what's blasphemous in the statement.

     


  3. 5 minutes ago, Rightarmfast said:

    I am not saying or confirming they were 150. However, I did record Rehan Khan and he did look 140+ to me. You have seen the videos yourself. And the other bowlers I am talking of, were comfortable about 4-5 yards quicker than Rehan. This was Rehan's own observation too. In 90's, nobody said they were bowling 150's. However, people did say they were faster than Srinath,

    One bowler who was kept out unfairly for sure, Ashish W Zaidi.


  4. 4 minutes ago, Rightarmfast said:

    Not just because I am a bihari, but I have met people who have sworn there were 150+ bowlers in Bihar in the past. 2 bowlers, I personally know and they used to be popular in 90's for being express fast.

    The thing is, that area of Bihar and Jharkhand is so underutilized, and biharis in general are very hard working. If the cricket management picks a few real talents from these areas and gives them support, I do believe a lot can happen

    Bihar doesn't even have a team or participation in Ranji for years, pathetic ,I have played cricket with guys from that area n found they were stronger n bowled faster then ave Indians in general, one or two played in Bombay did well locally , n were quick, but belonged to minority community n MCA would not pick them up even after doing well in qualifying tourneys


  5. It's time selectors show some balls, they were ready to keep out Ashwin n Jadeja rightfully then why not the mediocre BATSMEN, Rahane, Dhoni, get in new blood , Pant, Hooda, Shankar also Shami is the best bowler we have n we r taking away his confidence, we know Umesh is ave in ODIs but Shami has been exceptional n look at his record, he has to be in the team S Thakur is not even half the bowler Shami is.


  6. 4 minutes ago, express bowling said:

    Yarra Prithvi does look pacy in this highlight package

     

    All 3 wickets with bouncers or rising short balls on a brownish pitch

     

    http://www.hotstar.com/sports/cricket/series/yarra-troubles-tn-with-361-on-day-4/2001604021

    Express Bhai pace ki baat mat karo, with bhi TV pe, jokes apart, he has a slingy action n is a bit awkward to face, pace m not sure , L Yadav seem fast medium , Yarra might be quicker then Unadkunt


  7. 2 minutes ago, Muloghonto said:

    Bolded part, is 100% wrong. Because you cannot tell depth from that angle. Point is easily proven, when you look where the wicketkeeper is standing,in relation to the batsman from that angle, versus side-on view. 

    In a side-on view, the true length of the pitch is preserved in the 2d, hence side-on views are ok to tell who is faster/who is slower.

    head-on view, the image is approximating length AND depth, that is how you can tell whether a person is standing on another's head or directly behind them. But you CANNOT tell, from that angle, how much behind them, the wicketkeeper is standing. 

     

    What i am saying, is when you are seeing a ball bowled AT YOU or side-on, with a trained eye, you can tell if ball A is faster or slower than ball B. For skilled pros, they can tell them apart with great accuracy. For amateurs like us, we are not as accurate, but we still can tell them apart. But from head-on view, nobody can tell how fast the ball is, or which ball is faster than the other, with something like +/- 50kph range. 

    You can't for e.g., tell from the head-on view, how far the ball is bouncing, if you have no reference point (wickets, batsmen etc) to compare. This should tell you, how all you are doing, is repeating an optical illusion as a fact. 

     

    See the very point is visual memory n cues, we r comparing most of the time, n referencing based on things, when we have the same angle to view from then that becomes a good reference point, when for example we have the camera at normal angle when a bowler starts his runup, n delivers the ball, we have that view always as reference , that angle and it is not acute but pretty good, now when one is constantly watching different bowlers bowling and noticing thier speeds n taking those clues one becomes a decent judge of pace from that angle , n that is based on those factors, the pitch length is standard and the length ball delivered has an average distance to cover, one can certainly judge the pace, n that for me can have a accuracy to a degree based on abi!ity, RKT or someone involved with the sports n bowling in general certainly makes him a better judge, yes one cannot tell excatly if one is bowling 143 or 146 k but can tell if one is fast, fast medium or medium.Anyone can tell that Kumble was a fast leggie, Kuldeep a slower one.

    PK a medium pacer n Aaron a fast bowler, one can certainly observe Thommo was quick n if someone is bowling in 140s or 130, n that's a huge difference, now u gotta be kidding if u r telling me when u watch a game on telly you cannot visually see the difference when PK or Akhtar or evenZak was bowling, n that is exactly what RKT is saying that you can observe if someone is fast , express or fast medium or medium, n that's why the speeds are categorized as such, those r not arbitary numbers but can be visually interpreted, by most viewers a medium pacer, a fast medium, a fast n express bowler.


  8. Education menas nothing if one lacks common sense or logic, n you r not the only one here, if u do have. PHD or Masters in Physics, sports is about visual response more then anything else, a goalie responding to a kick n estimating the speed, swerve, angle, flight, everything in a split second.

    A trained eye as article above states can estimate speed pretty well, now what is a trained eye, n athlete, a goalie, a batsmen, a keeper, an avid sports watcher can also be an expert coz of his memory n experience, referencing the pace n comparing visually when observing a medium, medium fast n fast bowler becomes an inbuilt thing, many factors come into play to estimate the speed, but human body n mind is far intelligent n complex to interpret these from clues.

    Now a camera showing a bowler bowling from behind the runup to the keeper from. Above does give a good view n idea of the ball path, if u r saying that one cannot fathom what is quick or slow that's an oxymoron, why would one notice how quick Dhoni ran between the wkts, or stumped then?

    Sports itself mostly is about speed, accuracy or strength, we have been observing and applauding speed in most sports, yes naked eye cannot tell exact speed on a grand prize race but one can estimate the speed of the ball, also the modern camera n frame rates exceed what we are capable of noticing so that is ruled out.

    What ur talking is nonsense n illogical almost laughable that one cannot discern or compare speeds with the naked eye n that is the most basic requirements n inbuilt ability of the human body n allows us to play, Basketball, football, soccer, cricket, n most sports, it's responding to visual signal physically , a batter doesn't listen to the ball or smells the ball, but looks at the ball, he gauges the speed ,trajectory, angle,line n sesponds to it in a physical way n that is the basic essence of sports.

    Now from the viewers angle, the reason we watch n enjoy sports is ability to notice the same on TV , the swing, bounce, pace, the timing, the batsmens interpretation of pace can be affected by making y things , the height from which the ball is released, the wicket, the dynamics of the action, bowlers natural length, n psychology.


  9. 17 minutes ago, Muloghonto said:

    Your bias is noted against experts, but you simply saying ALL experts are biassed, doesn't make it so. It makes YOU crazy, to allege every single cricket professional out there is exgaggerating and using hyperbole. 

     

    Poor batsmanship exgaggerated pace, for professionals who's JOB is to negotiate fast deliveries, but YOU, an armchair critic, who hasn't faced any of them, can tell from a 2d image, with zero depth perception, how fast the bowlers were. 
    Sorry, we are not falling for your egotistic nonsense. 

     

    Whenever people claim ALL experts are wrong and they are right, it usually means two things : a) they are narcissitic egotists and b) they are bat-$hit crazy. 

     

    Menu
    Set Weather
    SearchAccountSign InSubscribe

    Visual speed estimates by police are guesses with no formula, just practice, to guide them

     
     
     
     
     
    300shares
     
     

     

    trooper-medina-traffic-stop-040606.jpgView full sizeDavid I. Andersen / The Plain Dealer, FileA State Highway Patrol trooper talks with a motorist pulled over for speeding on I-71 in Medina County. It's all guessing.

     

    Or, as the man in charge of police training standards for the entire state puts it, "dead reckoning."

    New police officers in Ohio receive no scientific training in estimating speeds of drivers in basic training. There's no timing of cars over fixed distances, no special methods of determining an actual speed, nothing with stopwatches.

    03cgspeed.jpgView full sizeWilliam Neff, The Plain Dealer

    There is just a repetition of watching cars go by and guessing speeds, then seeing how the guesses matches up with what the radar says.

    "There is no formula to apply," said Robert Fiatal, executive director of the Ohio Peace Officer Training Commission. "It's kind of a dead-reckoning kind of thing."

    An Ohio Supreme Court ruling Wednesday made a police officer's visual estimate of speed enough to make a speeding ticket stick. Though that had been the case in most of the state, the appeals court covering Cuyahoga County had required more than an officer's guess: radar readings or comparing a vehicle's speed to the speedometer reading in a police cruiser.

    The court ruled that an officer's estimate can hold up all by itself if an officer is trained by the Ohio Peace Officers Training Academy or a similar academy and has experience gauging speeds.

    The number of states that use that standard could not be determined Wednesday. Pennsylvania and Nebraska require more than just a visual speed estimate, though officers in those states have leeway to say a vehicle was traveling at an unsafe speed.

    The Ohio Peace Officer Training Commission sets standards that all students in the more than 70 police academies in the state must meet to graduate. Officials from the police academies in Cleveland Heights and at Cuyahoga Community College each said they use the state curriculum.

    Cleveland Heights Lt. Larry Shaffer said officers are taught to track - follow behind -- vehicles suspected of speeding to determine speed, but the required state training allows a reasonable estimate.

    "Before you would be certified you have to be fairly accurate with the naked eye," he said.

    Visually estimating the speed of vehicles is only a small part of a five-hour unit on speed, which also includes lessons on stopping distance, benefits of speed enforcement, types of speed laws, how to track a given vehicle and how to fill out a traffic ticket.

    Traffic radar used to be part of basic training for all officers, but each department now trains its own officers in using the radar or laser system it owns.

    State standards call for students to use four principles to estimate vehicle speeds: their own knowledge and experience in watching traffic, watching vehicles move past stationary objects, seeing if a vehicle is moving in an unusual way like bouncing or the driver is driving erratically.

    But the required curriculum doesn't tell students how to determine a specific speed using those principles.

    Instructors must take students to areas with different kinds of traffic and have them estimate speeds. The instructor would use radar on the vehicle so the student can compare results.

    "You just refine that and refine that by looking at the radar," Fiatal said.

    Standards call for students to estimate speeds of 20 vehicles and the instructor to calculate the difference between the estimate and the actual speed. Students pass if the average difference is five miles per hour or less.

    Fiatal said that training is "certainly a start" for new officers to learn to estimate speeds. He said when they learn to use radar they will have more chances to measure their impressions against radar readings. As they gain more experience, guesses will be more educated.

     

     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
    42 comments
    Please comment respectfully.

     

     
     
     
    + Follow
    Post comment as...
     
     
     
     

    From the Archive

    Avatar for jstthikin
     
     
    jstthikinJun 3, 2010
     
     

    Nearing the age of retirement and yet another reason for me to get the heck outta dodge - Ohio the heart of it all - what a joke!

     
     
     
    Avatar for mnmb3
     
     
    mnmb3Jun 3, 2010
     
     

    Our Constituional rights eroding right before your eyes. Sorry men and women in the Armed Forces, you have been dying for nothing. There will be no Constitition to up hold and preserve at this rate. (I know, I spend 22 yrs upholding and preserving myself. I love you guys.) I am sorry that the State of Ohio has chosen to belittle your brave and noble service

     
     
     
    Avatar for godofwine
     
     
    godofwineJun 3, 2010
     
     

     

    This will increase the amount of tickets written for DWB (Black driving thru a mostly White neighborhood, or DWW (White driving thru a mostly Black neighborhood). Not even including the tickets given by police because of boredom. This is a true story.

    In Norfolk while in the Navy I was riding with a friend of mine and he passed under a light that turned yellow just as he passed underneath (I remember clearly because the movement caught my eye). Seconds later we hear the sirens and pull over only to have the cop stop behind us.

    "Do you know why I pulled you over?"

    "No"

    "You ran a red light"

    "That light was yellow. Just TURNED yellow..."

    "No, it was red."

    After going back and forth the cop said, "The light was RED! Who the F**K do you think they are going to believe?"

    My buddy ended up paying the ticket and realizing that he was powerless, even with me as a witness. The only way you get out of a ticket is if the cop doesn't show up for court. If the cop shows up you lose. This law is going to make it even easier for cops to lie on you. I'm glad I don't have to go thru Linndale much anymore (though I know to look out for those cops). They can pull you over at random and say, "I saw you doing 42 in a 35", even if you were going 35. I use cruise control, even on city streets. This law needs to be repealed and the judges who voted on this kicked out.

     
     
     
    Avatar for WOT
     
     
    WOTJun 3, 2010
     
     

     

    I know that speeding is illegal, and I'm not trying to justify it.

    I have been driving for 25 years with 0 speed related accidents. I have no problem admitting that I speed. Not just a few miles over, I drive at 20-30 over and have doubled the speed limit on the highway on more than a few occasions. When I get a ticket, I pay it or go to court if I think I actually wasn't speeding at the time.

    That all being said, this new 'estimate' law is simple:
    Radar and Laser guns are expensive.
    Cities need revenue.
    Speeders are easy sources of cash.
    Guessing speed is FREE.

    It's ironic that I did a bit of research yesterday, before I'd even heard of this, to find out what the number one cause of car accidents was. And it's NOT speeding, It's distraction.

    Speeding isn't even in the top 5.

    This law is not about safety, it's about money. If it were about safety, there would be a hell of a lot more cell phone, makeup, radio-adjusting, eating, drowsy, childseat and seatbelt tickets written. But there aren't.

    I have yet to see a 'Cell Phone trap' set up in a school zone or a 'changing lanes without a turn signal' lookout on a highway overpass.

    You don't see this because it's now easier to guess cars' speed for free than bother with an expensive radar gun...

     

     
     
     
    Avatar for X-chips
     
     
    X-chipsJun 3, 2010
     
     

    Let me get this straight. The same officers who couldn't tell the difference between a dead woman and a dead deer on the side of the road now get to "guesstamate" the speed at which I'm driving? Sounds fair to me. NOT!

     
     
    Avatar for scoretied
     
     
    scoretiedJun 3, 2010
     
     

    x-chips, the "same" officers? Put away that broad brush and use something with a little more precision.

     
     
     
    Avatar for trinti
     
     
    trintiJun 3, 2010
     
     

    Hey scoretied, I dont think folks on this site are saying speeding is ok, what they are saying they dont trust the police judgement. You can be going 35mph and just because the police may be having a bad day, or dont like the way you look, can give you a speeding ticket. Would you like to take off from work for court to prove you was not speeding, and you know who will win.

     
     
    Avatar for scoretied
     
     
    scoretiedJun 3, 2010
     
     

     

    trinti,

    In other articles on this subject, I've actually seen posters claim that speed means nothing and that we should be able to go as fast as the traffic will bear. Having said that, I would be far more comfortable being stopped with radar than judgment.

     
     
     
    Avatar for scoretied
     
     
    scoretiedJun 3, 2010
     
     

     

    AH, another chance to go against the grain! In this case, the grain is made up of folks who think they have a "right" to drive at ridiculous speeds. If I'm in a 60 zone on a freeway, I typically nudge up to 70--and watch half the driving world blow past me at 80+. Some of you want to get out of Ohio? Try Pennsylvania, which has the highest fines imaginable. Move to Germany, where there is no maximum speed, just a minimum of 72 MPH; then we can hear you moan and groan about the six-month, $1,000 driving class you had to take to get a license in good ol' Deutschland.

    I love highway libertarians. I live on a street that cuts through from Mayfield Road to Ridgebury Boulevard in Lyndhurst. I'm at a four-way stop to boot. Various soccer moms and Jeff Gordon wannabes put on a real show. Last week, a lady with a small kid in the back of her Volvo station wagon blew through the stop sign at around 25-30 and flipped me off when I called out "Nice stop!" Why don't we make observing speed limits, even with a 10 MPH bonus, optional, along with red lights, stop signs, and lane markings. Do whatever you feel like.

     
     
     
    Avatar for RReagan
     
     
    RReaganJun 3, 2010
     
     

    There has always been a similar problem in this area. When an officer points a radar gun at a pack of cars and it comes back with a reading of 82, which car is actually going 82? I asked an officer at my golf course once, his answer - "the one that looks like he's pulling away from the pack is guilty". So if a guy passes you doing 82, but sees the cop quickly and slams on his brakes, leaving you pulling away from the pack at 67, you're guilty and pulled over for doing 82 in a 65 zone. The radar gun doesn't tell which car registered the speed it clocked.

     
     
     
    Avatar for trinti
     
     
    trintiJun 3, 2010
     
     

    Hey, they can't even tell a dead human body laying on the road from a dead deer. How can they tell how fast you going by only sight.

     
     
     
    Avatar for boneybenny
     
     
    boneybennyJun 3, 2010
     
     

    The right to be considered innocent until proven guilty is gone. 

    Anthony Sowell is referred to as "accused" serial killer by the media, even though there were dead bodies in his house. Until he is convicted, the media could be sued for not using "accused" in his description. 

    The rest of us are presumed guilty by the word of an unchallengeable policemans guess. The Bill of Rights means nothing anymore.

     
     
     
    Avatar for caygey33
     
     
    caygey33Jun 3, 2010
     
     

    Voters should keep passing police and fire taxes. What we need is more law enforcement who never prevent anything. The main job for most cops is to see how much money they can raise. The problem is that they are trying to get the money from people who either not working or making minimum wages.

     
     
     
    Avatar for boneybenny
     
     
    boneybennyJun 3, 2010
     
     

    I bet Linndale (and the other speed trap communities) will double their income.

     
     
     
    Avatar for lra064
     
     
    lra064Jun 3, 2010
     
     

    I am a retired Police Officer and agree that estimated speeds should be used but only for speeds that are far above the speed limit. You know, 90 in a 60 or 75 in a 35 etc. 13 MPH over the limit is cutting it too short for an estimite. A very large majorty of Police Officers give 15 over the limit except in school zones so this 13 is kind of low anyway. There were only a few that I know of that gave 13 over and they were looked at by the rest of us as jerks. Things may have changed though.

     
     
     
    Avatar for born2hang
     
     
    born2hangJun 3, 2010
     
     

    The radar reading was throw out because the officer didn't bring his certification to use radar to the trial. 
    .
    I think the ruling is odd, but I guess I could see accepting it if it was a car going well in excess of the posted speed limit. Then it would be obvious the car was speeding. And, while you're going on just the word of the officer, we also go off the word of the officer when they ticket you for going through a stop sign or red light. And, with radar, you're also relying on the officer's word that he aimed the radar at the right car. With stop signs and red lights, the cop can see the offense clearly. But speed is hard to judge with the naked eye. Again, unless the car is going way over the speed limit. This officer thought the guy was going 70mph and the radar said 82 mph, so that suggests this officer was not very accurate. In the case it also says the cop filled out the ticket wrong.
    .
    This would all be of a lot less concern to me if there weren't so many communities that use speeding tickets for revenue generators, and if there weren't a lot of officers willing to lie in court.

     
     
    Avatar for born2hang
     
     
    born2hangJun 3, 2010
     
     

    Also, again, this officer was off by 12MPH in his naked eye estimate of the speed. 12 MPH can make a big difference on a ticket, and knock you up into a higher fine. 
    .
    Like I said, I merely find this ruling odd. I'm not overly worried that it'll be abused, because if cops wanted to routinely pull innocent people over they can already do that by saying you were weaving, or went through a stop sign, or went through a red light when it was actually yellow, etc. But I really don't think you should get tcketed for speeding without a radar gun as evidence unless you were going way, way over the speed limit. If people start getting tickets when they were not extremely far over the speed limit and the officer has no radar evidence, it's going to cause a lot of bad will between citizens and the police/courts. We already have that going on with the way some of our communities engage in excessive traffic enforcement to generate money. 
    .
    With all that said, I don't get pulled over much at all, and when I have been, I felt I deserved it, so I don't have any personal experience feeling unfairly ticketed. But I do feel there are some suburbs that seem to harass people with ticketing while others do not. If all the various police forces in Northeast Ohio would just agree to do things in good faith, there'd be no problem IMO.

     
     
    Avatar for mnmb3
     
     
    mnmb3Jun 3, 2010
     
     

    Who is to say you weren't going only a little over. The Cop can say whatever he wants, and by the way, you are now opened up to other violations. The Cop may believe that e smells alcohol and may want to search your car. Next at 11:00, how to make sure your papers are in order when going into Indiana.

     
     
     
    Avatar for cleavlander
     
     
    cleavlanderJun 3, 2010
     
     

     

    thats it....or i leave ohio or I have to sell my porsche!!!! all you sports car fans, owners , enthusiasts know cops are jealous of us owners, and now they got a license to ticket us, give us points and our insurance goes up...thats nice! NOT!

    go tribe!

     
     
     
    Avatar for moongoose
     
     
    moongooseJun 3, 2010
     
     

    The court should have included a clause that as long as the police officer writes a ticket based upon unscientific personal observations/evaluations there will be no trial; immediate finding by officer of guilt and ship the offender to jail immediately. No appeal. We have now become the old USSR or some third world nation where folks like McFaul walk and grandma goes to the can.

     
     
     
    Avatar for quest4news
     
     
    quest4newsJun 3, 2010
     
     

    This is one of the reasons I want to relocate outside of Ohio. Cleveland taxes are outrageous and now the police can randomly stop you and claim you were speeding. This will definitely take DWB (Driving While Black) to a new level.

     
     
     
    Avatar for 2012
     
     
    2012Jun 3, 2010
     
     

    It was already that for most of the state! Now it's in Cuyahoga County! 271 will be the most fun! I bet that's why they changed it! They watch 271 like a hawk! Their radars can only pick one car at a time! I always thought they needed to show proof before you got a ticket! You know to prove guilt not accuse!!! Interesting to see that most of the state was already that way!!!

     
     
     
    Avatar for lakemistakes
     
     
    lakemistakesJun 3, 2010
     
     

    Just another reason to leave Ohio (like the last two generations of Ohio's college educated productive citizens have done en masse). And it doesn't really matter how fast you drive away.

     
     
     
    Avatar for loiosh
     
     
    loioshJun 3, 2010
     
     

    I feel if you cant beat em, Join em. So I suggest that if you happen to have a few hours, and a camcorder,and maybe some velcro, you could maybe park by an intersection with a traffic light, and video tape which cop cars that pull up to a red light, pop on there emergency lights till they get through the intersection, then turn them off, only to pull into the local resturaunt and get some food, or drink, surely that has to be illegal. then post a bunch on facebook and call your local t.v. news.

     
     
     
    Avatar for delcabo
     
     
    delcaboJun 3, 2010
     
     

     

    My kids riding in the back seat understand the need for speed limits on roads. Strange that some grown-ups fail to appreciate the rationale for speed limits and enforcement thereof.

    I'm not a perfect driver, and I know if I am speeding, I am fair game for a citation. It's not complicated.

    Drive in a reasonable manner-- even with "the flow of traffic" a few ticks above the llimit-- and you won't be ticketed. Try it, you'll be amazed.

    REALLY, Benny? How many folks reading this have been driving along stone cold sober yet arrested for DUI on the officer's hunch? How about ticketed for speeding when you were merely traveling at exactly the speed limit or below?

    Long before this ruling, officers have had the option to charge with "speed unreasonable for conditions". Also, give more credit to Judges, who still have the ability to find reasonable doubt. Remember, Judges in large part used to be criminal defense attorneys. Appropriately, they bring to the bench with them a healthy dose of skepticism.

     
     
    Avatar for boneybenny
     
     
    boneybennyJun 3, 2010
     
     

    Delcabo, 

    The constitution was written to prevent government abuses of authority. Today you find no problem with police "making the roads safer" in the absence of evidence. Tomorrow they can claim to be getting tougher on "the war on drugs" or "gun crime" and search anyone's house without a search warrant. I doubt your attitude would be so casual if SWAT decided your house was next on the list for random search and seizure.

     
     
     
    Avatar for boneybenny
     
     
    boneybennyJun 3, 2010
     
     

    Cop having a bad day? Here's your "pick a number" ticket. 

    School levy fails? Here's your ticket for 50 in a school zone.

    Tax increase fails and mayor threatens to lay off police? EVERYONE is speeding.

    "We the people hold the potential for abuses to be self-evident. That a government by the police, of the police and for the police shall not perish from Ohio".

     
     
     
    Avatar for 4God
     
     
    4GodJun 3, 2010
     
     

    THE BEST WAY TO BEAT IT IS TO HAVE A BACKSEAT CAMCORDER IN YOUR VEHICLE RECORDING THE SPEED OF THE CAR! WHERE THERE IS A WILL THERE IS A WAY TO BEAT THIS CORRUPTIVE SYSTEM WE CALL GOVERNMENT!

     
     
    Avatar for boneybenny
     
     
    boneybennyJun 3, 2010
     
     

    4GOD, 

    Under the constitution, we are presumed innocent until PROVEN guilty. The burden of PROOF is on the prosecution, not the accused.

     
     
     
    Avatar for delcabo
     
     
    delcaboJun 3, 2010
     
     

     

    My kids riding in the back seat understand the need for speed limits on roads. Strange that some grown-ups fail to appreciate the rationale for speed limits and enforcement thereof.

    I'm not a perfect driver, and I know if I am speeding, I am fair game for a citation. It's not complicated.

    Drive in a reasonable manner-- even with "the flow of traffic" a few ticks above the llimit-- and you won't be ticketed. Try it, you'll be amazed.

    REALLY, Benny? How many folks reading this have been driving along stone cold sober yet arrested for DUI on the officer's hunch? How about ticketed for speeding when you were merely traveling at exactly the speed limit or below?

    Long before this ruling, officers have had the option to charge with "speed unreasonable for conditions". Also, give more credit to Judges, who still have the ability to find reasonable doubt. Remember, Judges in large part used to be criminal defense attorneys. Appropriately, they bring to the bench with them a healthy dose of skepticism.

     
     
    Avatar for trescoco
     
     
    trescocoJun 3, 2010
     
     

     

    Delcabo.. "Also, give more credit to Judges, who still have the ability to find reasonable doubt. Remember, Judges in large part used to be criminal defense attorneys. Appropriately, they bring to the bench with them a healthy dose of skepticism."

    Judges in the state of Ohio are elected. They don't have to have a criminal defense background... they can honestly look good in a suit and get elected. 
    Prime example Annette Butler was a Federal Attorney working in the civil division working mostly on the business side of civil law, and was running for Bill Mason's job. Granted not a judge position... and she lost by a landslide, but still, there aren't very many requirements to run for a judges seat...

     
     
     
    Avatar for clequestions
     
     
    clequestionsJun 3, 2010
     
     

     

    Why no mention (the commenters or the aeticle) that this is an almost all-Republican Ohio Supreme Court that made this ruling? The party that claims protection of individual rights, limited government intrusion, etc.

    Hmm... Just sayin.

     
     
     
    Avatar for trescoco
     
     
    trescocoJun 3, 2010
     
     

     

    This won't last long. There is too much faith put on the testimony of officers, and too many errors of judgement. The ruling will be repealed.

    If it were to happen to me, I'd put the officer on trial, and make him prove that he could estimate the speed accurately, I'd also use the amount of time he had actually radar enforcing traffic, and prove that a 5 hr certification course in the academy just isn't good enough. I'd have a jury of my peers who all drive, and looking at the evidence I'd get acquitted, or a hung jury. Either way worth my money.

    PS. the kid (22 yrs) who got the ticket was supposedly doing 70 (officer's estimate) in a 60, now given that the course requires you to estimate within 5 mph of the actual speed... your looking at the kid was driving 65-75 mph....

    How was he gaging his speed? Was he using the flow of traffic? I would have to estimate that most drivers have a driving fluctuation between 0-7 mphs above the speed limit at any given time. If the flow was going 65 that is between the estimate....

    Did he just finish passing someone, and was trying to get over? I mean, the cop saw him, what was the cop doing? sitting there without a radar gun? He had to have followed him in order to pull him over, right? So the cop had his speedometer in his car to see how fast the car was going... and don't most to all police cruisers have a radar gun installed on the dashboard? I mean I got pulled over by cops in the opposite direction that knew how fast I was going...

    Plus, this is going to throw out any chance to fight radar guns. If the gun was inaccurate, not on a steady "tripod" to accurately gage speed. Now the cop can just say... well I knew he was speeding.

     
     
    Avatar for spunky721
     
     
    spunky721Jun 3, 2010
     
     

     

    Actually, according to the previous article, the cop estimated 72mph. He had radar & that gave 82 or 83mph but the radar result was thrown out in court. But it means his estimate was 10+mph off.

    Stupid ruling. I mean, really stupid. I can't fathom how the ohio supreme court let this one fly. Well, yes I can. Just like most other things in Ohio. And they wonder why there is a so-called brain drain. I certainly couldn't get away fast enough.

     
     
    Avatar for trescoco
     
     
    trescocoJun 3, 2010
     
     

     

    My bad.

    I think WEWS reported 70... but the question would have to be why was the radar thrown out? And why, would the Supreme Court of Ohio allow an officer's testimony, who is supposed to be trained to detect speeds within +- 5, when he speed was so off?

    Where was the dashboard camera? Doesn't that have an officer's speed on it as well?

     
     
     
    Avatar for tom19511
     
     
    tom19511Jun 3, 2010
     
     

    OK, Let me get this straight. 
    Police can guess if you are speeding and issue a citation. 
    HMMMM
    So, can I now guess that the judge that ruled on this is not doing his job by just looking at him? 
    This sounds like a big moneymaker to me. Watch out on the last
    week of the month.
    Don't forget this scheme when you vote. I certainly won't

     
     
     
    Avatar for negativequity
     
     
    negativequityJun 3, 2010
     
     

    maybe the state can capitalize on our great new 'psychic police'- just think, get a speeding ticket and for an additional $20 the officer can tell you if your spouse is cheating on you or if you should ask for a raise.
    and i guess they won't need consent to search your vehicle any longer since they obviously already know what's in your trunk or glovebox

     
     
     
    Avatar for boneybenny
     
     
    boneybennyJun 3, 2010
     
     

    Today the police can pick a number out of thin air and write a speeding ticket, and you have no recourse. 
    Tomorrow you'll get a DUI based off a cops "hunch".
    Next week Ohio uses eraser fluid on the fourth amendment and your car can be searched at will.
    We've just started sliding down the slippery slope. Game over, we lose. Enjoy the ride.

     
     
    Avatar for Ministry Of Truth
     
     
    Ministry Of TruthJun 3, 2010
     
     

    That "eraser fluid on the fourth amendment" happened a long time ago. I forget the case, but a dissent in the US Supreme Court actually referred to the unwritten "drug exception" to the 4th Amendment.

    I've got to add that deporting all illegal immigrants would require multiple unconstitutional searches of each and every person in America, including citizens and legal immigrants.

     
     
     
    Avatar for rmb3005
     
     
    rmb3005Jun 3, 2010
     
     

    This rulling opens up a whole new avenue of revenue generation for cities. So now we'll see police everywhere with drivers pulled over for "speeding", when in reality, they were just driving with the flow of traffic. This ruling gives new meaning to the phrase "police state".

     
     
     
    Avatar for Scott Emick
     
     
    Scott EmickJun 3, 2010
     
     

    Too bad much of the state is more focused on revenue generation over safety. Now the supreme court is endorsing it too. The government is rotten to the core.

     
     
    Avatar for jimmy141
     
     
    jimmy141Jun 3, 2010
     
     

    I agree, instead of writing tickets they should be stopping these people and giving them advice on how to control their speed.

     
     
     
     

     

    The daily front page

    • More dining guides & reviews »

    ACTIVE DISCUSSIONS

    NEWS UPDATES IN YOUR INBOX

    Get the latest news delivered to your inbox plus breaking news when it happens
     
     optional
    Check here if you do not want to receive additional email offers and information.See our privacy policy
     
     
     
     

     

    cleveland.com an advance Ohio platform in partnership with The Plain Dealer
     

    Registration on or use of this site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement and Privacy Policy

    © 2017 Advance Ohio All rights reserved (About Us).
    The material on this site may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, cached or otherwise used, except with the prior written permission of Advance Ohio

    Community Rules apply to all content you upload or otherwise submit to this site.

    ad_choices_arrow_transparent.png Ad Choices

     
     


  10. 6 hours ago, putrevus said:

     

    When Steve Waugh was at Somerset as a young man, he recalled the atmosphere in the dressing room changing a full week before their appointment with Mr Clarke. Waugh then faced what he called "the most awkward and nastiest" spell of his career. "It was something you can't prepare for."

     

    Speed is just not enough, Agarkar too bowled 140k but there was no nastiness in his bowling. Agarkar landing his 140 k and Garner landing his 140 k deliveries have different nastiness. That comes from the length at which those tall bowlers land the ball and the bounce they generated thats why IMHO this talk about just speed is irrelevant.

     

    Aaron can generate as much speed as anyone but he has no control and he is already yesterday's news.Sad thing is you can't even say he didn't fulfill his potential.

    That is exactly my point, batters judge pace by how hard the ball hits the bat, how much the bowler hurries them, but thru video one can analyse the total path from hand to keeper, how far the keeper was, one does get an idea better then the bastmen.

    The ball travel in XY plane which is relevant n not z plane much unless conventional or reverse swing n that movement will not change the distance of the path much, so his talks about 2d n 3d is juvenile, one gets n idea or estimate of pace , based on factors n certainly a guy can tell Aaron is much quicker then PK which per Ghantabhai is untrue, mind boggling.


  11. 1 hour ago, tweaker said:

    Whenever this selection committee gets a chance to select a Iyer,Pant, Shankar,, they always mess up by selecting Karthik, Nehra.

     

    Iyer should have made to the squad till now

    These selectors r useless, imbeciles n don't have balls, the only reason some youngsters got chances in A teams n Board president teams is a lot of things coincided same time, A tours, BPs eleven n Duleep trophy so thier hand was forced.

    This selection committee doesn't have the balls to rest or kick Dhoni, Nehra, Rahane n others, n recycling old failures then blooding new talent.It seems like musical chairs as far as selections, no direction, planning, just idiots who haven't even found answers for I Dias weak t20 batting, Middle order in ODi, selecting wrong players for wrong formats.

Guest, sign in to access all features.

×