daryl harper-sabotage?

[cowboysfan]

infra-red. Hot Spot is an infra-red imaging system used in cricket to determine whether the ball has struck the batsman, bat or pad. The technology was developed by the military and works by placing two infrared cameras at either end of the pitch. These cameras identify the heat generated from the ball hitting the batsman's bat or pad. A negative image is then produced using a computer system which will show the exact point of contact between the ball and the batsman from wiki.

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[cowboysfan]

AFAIK, cost is not the inhibiting factor. It takes around 4-5 minutes to generate hotspots images and the game obviously cannot be held up for that long. I am disappointed to note that none of our senior players have spoken out on the issue. They do seem to deliberately limit their roles in influencing the way cricket would evolve. Instead, we have to suffer mediocre players like Harmison adding to the cacophony, according to whom: "We've done without the referral system for more than 100 years of Test cricket and unless someone can show real benefits, I think we can do without them for the next 100."

it takes less than a minute to generate the hotspot iamge.

[Guest dada_rocks]

I meant hardware & s/w costs .. Yes I have no idea why our big wigs shut up and put up with soo much muggery :mad::mad::mad::mad::mad:

Khujali for nobel peace prize runs deep in our society.. every freaking body is vying for the humblest guy who was loved by all award

[cowboysfan]

anotherhowler from harper-now we have proof.

[graphic23]

Idiotic decision by both the on-field umpire and Harper. Pathetic display of cricketing knowledge. Idiots are in charge of the game here.

[Guest Hiten.]

I hope ICC does not blame the referral system on this occassion. Its the men who are sitting behind the computer, that are incompetent.

[fineleg]

what was the incident today? UPDATE: Ok, read abt the chanders decision - height was the issue.

[Holysmoke]

I am disappointed to note that none of our senior players have spoken out on the issue. They do seem to deliberately limit their roles in influencing the way cricket would evolve. Instead, we have to suffer mediocre players like Harmison adding to the cacophony, according to whom: "We've done without the referral system for more than 100 years of Test cricket and unless someone can show real benefits, I think we can do without them for the next 100."

"I still prefer the hot-spot system to identify the contact between the ball and bat. The LBW decisions are not convincing enough as the Hawk Eye gives a 22-yard view which the new referral system does not agree with ... As to whether the ball would have hit the stumps or not," Tendulkar said.

[cowboysfan]

harper has taken over as the biggest idiot on the panel.

[graphic23]

****er has given another one out unfairly!

[punjabi_khota]

R.I.P referral system.

[cowboysfan]

R.I.P referral system.

rather RIP harper but thats not going to happen.

[punjabi_khota]

The first decision was on field umpire's fault, and the second one was Harper's fault. It is very clearly mentioned in the rules that a LBW decision by on field umpire CANNOT be changed unless one of the following happens: 1). Ball pitched outside leg and he was initially given OUT => change to Not Out. 2). Ball pitched in line with stumps and given not out because the on field umpire thought it pitched outside=> Changed to Out Similarly with the contact with pad being in line or outside the line of offstump. The height issue CANNOT be resolved with the help of referral. So in case of Chanderpaul, since the onfield umpire gave him out and the ball pitched in line and hit in line, the referral CANNOT change the decision to not out. So the the on field umpire is at fault for giving him out at the first place. In case of Nash, the on field umpire thought the ball was going above the stumps , so gave him Not out. The referral umpire CANNOT use predictive software (Hawk eye) to see if it would go above the stumps or not. So, he cannot change the decision!! But he did. So he is at fault

[bunny]

Why cant we use the complete hawk-eye? Why do you need umpires to predict the path? (surely a software will do much better than human eyes, no?) Also allow for some margin in Hawk-eye, i.e., if Hawkeye's prediction is that the ball's hitting the outside of the outside half of the leg/offstump or its hitting the absolute top of the stump you declare it to be not out (or you go with the field umpire's verdict). But otherwise Hawk-eye should be used. At least the prediction should be made available.

[bunny]

The height issue CANNOT be resolved with the help of referral.

That's incorrect.

[punjabi_khota]

That's incorrect.

no.

[punjabi_khota]

Why cant we use the complete hawk-eye? Why do you need umpires to predict the path? (surely a software will do much better than human eyes' date=' no?) Also allow for some margin in Hawk-eye, i.e., if Hawkeye's prediction is that the ball's hitting the outside of the outside half of the leg/offstump or its hitting the absolute top of the stump you declare it to be not out (or you go with the field umpire's verdict). But otherwise Hawk-eye should be used. At least the prediction should be made available.[/quote'] Because it is impossible to take into account the hardness/softness of the ball, ground etc on the fly as the match progresses, which all change the bounce.

[bunny]

Because it is impossible to take into account the hardness/softness of the ball' date=' ground etc on the fly as the match progresses, which all change the bounce.[/quote'] All this is captured by the variables: hitting point, velocity (which includes direction) and gravity.

[bunny]

no.

Can you quote from some rulebook because I think I have already seen decisions being reversed based on height issues ?