We will never get an umpire's call in our favour with match in balance

[R!TTER]

7 hours ago, BCCISelector said:

My point is that we can't have 0.0001% of ball clipping be given OUT, when 49.999% of ball hitting is being given NOT OUT based on an arbitrary umpire's call made in less than 2 seconds.

There's a simple solution to that - bring bag the pre(?) WWII lbw rule & make the ball pitch in line of the stumps to be given out! Then make any ball clipping stumps  be given out, no *ing umpires call 

Also make it the same for balls pitching in line - no umpire's call. There's so many ways to make it work, we just need actual intent in solving this problem 

Edited July 14, 2025 by R!TTER

[R!TTER]

16 hours ago, EnterTheVoid said:

Umpire's call is to account for the margin of error in the DRS.

No actually it's a *ing cunning way to allow incompetent/biased umpires to escape scrutiny! You can't tell me you haven't noticed the blatant calls against us in major tourneys or away series?

[bowl_out]

15 hours ago, BCCISelector said:

So your objection is regarding the % and not the inherent bias of the umpire's call?

My point is that we can't have 0.0001% of ball clipping be given OUT, when 49.999% of ball hitting is being given NOT OUT based on an arbitrary umpire's call made in less than 2 seconds.

DRS should be consistent: all <50% clipping is NOT OUT and all >50% clipping is OUT. This would actually reduce the number of LBWs since all >50% are currently being given OUT by DRS anyway.

I don't mind a higher or lower % as long as it is consistently applied by ignoring the on-field umpire's 2 second opinion.

 

My point is that cricket has always operated on the rule that The umpire's decision is final.

Suddenly questioning the umpire's integrity and calling their decision arbitrary doesn't make sense.

 

We do have a % based decision now as well.

>50% : OUT

<50% : Stick to umpire's decision.

 

DRS = Decision REVIEW system, not a Decision making system, simply because the technology is error-prone as well and works on predicted path.

 

We might still have controversies if we switch to objective decision making. Let's say they pick >70% hitting as OUT -  a ball hitting 71% would be out, while 69% is not out. To the naked eye, they will look exactly the same, and people would start questioning the credibility of ball tracking.