Umpire’s call

[coffee_rules]

TIL , the real reason for holding the umpires call . It is not protect the umpires, but account for margin of error for the predictive algorithm of Hawkeye. Fair enough.

 

 

Well, this explanation from Nasser Hussain will end up the debate of umpire's call pic.twitter.com/z0k5ft2mWV

— Sunil the Cricketer (@1sInto2s) October 27, 2023

[dilliboy]

That we knew..all I don't understand is how can impact on the pads be umpire's call? What is the uncertainty in that event?

[coffee_rules]

4 minutes ago, dilliboy said:

That we knew..all I don't understand is how can impact on the pads be umpire's call? What is the uncertainty in that event?

Impact is the ball hitting the pads in the line of impacting the stumps. It is predictive too

[dilliboy]

18 minutes ago, coffee_rules said:

Impact is the ball hitting the pads in the line of impacting the stumps. It is predictive too

How? Ball has already hit the pads and you can clearly determine if the stumps are in line or not at that point 

[goose]

Before DRS umpire has to be certain in his mind ball is hitting which has always led to some that are hitting being given and some not given. DRS preserves this tendency beautifully. 

[Serpico]

jay shah you'll never see heaven. pic.twitter.com/L5Z2gsgOj0

— کشف (@kashafudduja_) October 27, 2023

Edited October 27, 2023 by Serpico

[Texan]

If technology has margin for error, how are umpires so good at predicting where the ball is going to end up? Even umpires have this margin of error, most likely even greater than technology. So, ICC should at some point look at making decisions binary: it is either out or not out, not dependent on what decision the umpire made. I think "umpire's call" was a good interim state, but now you need to get past it.

 

As the laws state that the batsman should get the benefit of the doubt, what my suggestion would be is that keep a very low margin for error (say the outside 1/4 of the ball just clipping the stumps). All such extremely marginal decisions must be given as NOT OUT.  Otherwise, if at least 1/4 of the ball is hitting the stumps then give it out. This way, we respect the notion of "giving benefit of doubt to the batsman" and also make decision making consistent.

 

[coffee_rules]

1 hour ago, dilliboy said:

How? Ball has already hit the pads and you can clearly determine if the stumps are in line or not at that point 

That’s got to do with more than 50% of the ball hitting the pad in line of the wicket zone. If the impact is hitting in less than 50% in case of off stump then it’s umpire’s call. It’s the same rule for hitting the stumps as well

 

In the above case , the ball is more then 50% outside the wicket zone both on pads (impact) and wickets (hitting)

Edited October 27, 2023 by coffee_rules

[coffee_rules]

19 minutes ago, Texan said:

If technology has margin for error, how are umpires so good at predicting where the ball is going to end up? Even umpires have this margin of error, most likely even greater than technology. So, ICC should at some point look at making decisions binary: it is either out or not out, not dependent on what decision the umpire made. I think "umpire's call" was a good interim state, but now you need to get past it.

 

As the laws state that the batsman should get the benefit of the doubt, what my suggestion would be is that keep a very low margin for error (say the outside 1/4 of the ball just clipping the stumps). All such extremely marginal decisions must be given as NOT OUT.  Otherwise, if at least 1/4 of the ball is hitting the stumps then give it out. This way, we respect the notion of "giving benefit of doubt to the batsman" and also make decision making consistent.

 

As the technology improves with cameras capturing more frames per second and predictive software reduces the margin of error to lesser than 3.6 mm , they can decide to do away with the option.

 

It is a misnomer that in case of beyond the margin of error,  that umpires have a lesser margin of error. some umpires like Erasmus (serial not-outer)  can’t give out even plum decisions out. It means that if technology cannot predict beyond the margin of error , whatever decision umpire had made , stays. A not-out stays not out (Shamsi) and an out decision stays out (VDM) . But two umpires call on impact and stumps should be an automatic not out as there is so much of doubt by the software that the BOD should go to the batsman. Harsha explained it well here

 

 

[coffee_rules]

Idiot says Nasser has taken money from tech company to promote it.

 

 

Paid to speak for tech to show tech is right .he is suggesting tech is right @imVkohli isn’t Coz tech must have paid the broadcaster to show how important is tech .. Ok if the tech is right go with tech y do u need umpires to stick to the their own decisions ? Utterly nonsense… https://t.co/7Ai0FaqY8F

— Harbhajan Turbanator (@harbhajan_singh) October 27, 2023

Edited October 27, 2023 by coffee_rules

[IndianRenegade]

30 minutes ago, coffee_rules said:

Idiot says Nasser has taken money from tech company to promote it.

 

 

Did he even watch the video? Nasser is actually not claiming tech is right, but saying tech has a margin of error, so when the tech's results are within the margin of error they fallback to the umpire. 

[Teengunalagaan]

1 hour ago, coffee_rules said:

Idiot says Nasser has taken money from tech company to promote it.

 

 

I am absolutely convinced he was at-least down a bottle, no one in their right mind can spew so much non sense, or may be his nephew was using his account 

[Number]

Did anyone notice the ball before it wasn't a wide as it brushed Shamsi's thigh pad. But umpire gave that wide to give Rauf another chance to get Shamsi out, otherwise over would have been finished with that.

Edited October 28, 2023 by Number

[Frustrated]

Thing is that Pak came back into the match only becz of Umpire's call.  Van Der Dussen was given out LBW on umpire's call on two counts 1) Impact: Umpire's call 2)Hitting : Umpire's call.     

[Frustrated]

Harbhajan Singh must be getting paid heavily by PCB to create baseless propaganda on twitter that Umpire's call costed Pak(the Lumber 1 team) the WC.  

[dilliboy]

5 hours ago, coffee_rules said:

That’s got to do with more than 50% of the ball hitting the pad in line of the wicket zone. If the impact is hitting in less than 50% in case of off stump then it’s umpire’s call. It’s the same rule for hitting the stumps as well

 

In the above case , the ball is more then 50% outside the wicket zone both on pads (impact) and wickets (hitting)

They are different events though..the impact on pads is an event which has already happened so there is no uncertainty whether the pad is in line with the stumps. Hence, no reason for umpire's call.

 

For the assessing whether the ball will hit the stumps, it still has to travel a certain distance hence there is uncertainty in its final trajectory. This is where umpire's call comes into play.

[jf1gp_1]

I am no issus with version of current umpires call. Why is no one talking about van der dussen call ? Live he looked notout, replays before ball tracking i was convinced this will be reversed but umpires call. So it evens out in a match. If they start giving umpires call as out, we can then move to a 2 days test match and shut down 50 over cricket. 

[Trichromatic]

16 minutes ago, dilliboy said:

They are different events though..the impact on pads is an event which has already happened so there is no uncertainty whether the pad is in line with the stumps. Hence, no reason for umpire's call.

 

For the assessing whether the ball will hit the stumps, it still has to travel a certain distance hence there is uncertainty in its final trajectory. This is where umpire's call comes into play.

 

It's not only the prediction which has margin of error, but any measurement will have margin of error even when event has happened. 

 

https://www.the-mad-scientist.net/uncertainty-in-measurement.html

 

Quote

Example: A stick that is 30 centimeters with an uncertainty of +/- 1cm means that the stick is actually between 29 and 31 centimeters long.  Most electronic balances read to 0.01g, but others (ones used in precise analytical experimentation) read to 0.0001 or better.  

 

Although the ball has already hit the pads, determining that it was within line of stumps or not is not possible with 100% accuracy. Same goes with ball pitching in the line.

[Tillu]

Even with the error margins and everything I have more trust in technology than these shady umpires. As Warner said the other day broadcasters should start displaying the umpiring stats.

 

At this point they should do away with Umpires call and give it out if it's hitting the stumps. Thats the only way to get rid of these dodgy umpires. Umpires call was brought in the first place to give some degree of autonomy to the umpires without which we don't even need them.

Edited October 28, 2023 by Tillu

[MK55]

35 minutes ago, Trichromatic said:

 

It's not only the prediction which has margin of error, but any measurement will have margin of error even when event has happened. 

 

https://www.the-mad-scientist.net/uncertainty-in-measurement.html

 

 

Although the ball has already hit the pads, determining that it was within line of stumps or not is not possible with 100% accuracy. Same goes with ball pitching in the line.

When there’s no predictive component, it just boils down to tracking the ball based of camera frames. It’s straight forward. Of course there will be a margin of error but that should be extremely marginal. And in any case way more accurate than what he umpires eyes suggest. 

Tennis has Hawkeye. They don’t have this umpires call nonsense. Cricket should get rid of it too. At least for that portion when there’s no actual ‘prediction’ of the ball trajectory. And for the later part, may be do some more back testing and calibrate the margin of error and have a threshold based decision boundary.