No UDRS for Sri Lanka-India Tests

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[thevortex]

Wrong again. This discussion started after you posted that article that screamed : "Stop this nonsense" ... all Iam asking is show me where this nonsense is. Six months later me and others are still waiting.

Are you saying you did not even make a single post commending Hawkeye before then?

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[thevortex]

To answer your question though the nonsense is out there. Even in this recent Ponting dismissal. Can anybody believe that Ponting would have still been there if the Hawkeye system was in force out there?!!!

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[thevortex]

yes but I make it a point to back up my claims with evidence. Infact while responding to you on H/E related threads I have produced 2 or 3 videos to back up my claim. One of it was a detailed explanation using evidence from a clean bowled delivery to illustrate that H/E got it dead on. Whats your contribution so far that anyone has agreed with ? Nothing.

Evidence? I am yet to see anything from you which proves how and why Hawkeye's output should have to be trusted to give a batsman out or in! And for the nth time allow me to remind you that for framing an opinion, I dont necessarily have to consult and gather around a bunch of people and convince them of my own point of view. Good that there are people agreeing with you. That is one thing. To mistake that for the absolute truth - now that could be one for posterity :).

[thevortex]

So, at least you admit that your awe and support for Hawkeye existed before that article...

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[thevortex]

Its not like I made elaborate efforts to hide it. I have openly said that I would take H/E JUST because its un-biased. Now the reason why you see everybody being critical of you is because you have shown NOTHING to back up your claim. So once again where is your evidence to show H/E got it horribly wrong that everyone agrees ( ala Bucknor or Rudi or Ashoka De'Silva or Taufel ) ? If you cant remember even one such incident means that you are a un-ashamed apologist that is desperately trying to save your beloved umpires regardless of what facts say.

So I guess at least one thing is put down. Your statement that my article is what started this off is untrue.

Lets break this down to the absolute smallest. YOU : H/E = nonsense. ME : Show me ONE such evidence that the majority agree. YOU : Silence. So in short if you want to be taken seriously come up with the evidence. Else you are just a bunch of hot air.

Correction again. What is hot air is your espousal and rabid defense of Hawkeye. Because there is nothing to defend precisely. Since you were the one to defend, you are the one duty bound to come up with evidence. On my part I am simply pointing out that there is no evidence. How much more clear can it get? I will give you an example - an entirely new road system is being laid. The contractor is asked for plans and reasons for the entirely new design. He says - just watch the traffic and tell me if you see any problem. Then we can see if any changes are needed!!! Laughable, is it not?!

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[thevortex]

But the road system (H/E) in this case is already operational and that too for a substantial amount of time . So show me the accidents if it is soo buggy as per your claim. That is my point. If there arent any casualties it simply means that it is NOT erroneous.

You really are that contractor!!! :) You were supposed to submit evidence before implementing the system. Do you accept that you did not and still do not have that evidence? That is the whole point here.

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[thevortex]

No I do not. And I dont have anything to prove or disprove as Iam not the inventor of H/E. As far as H/E is concerned they openly claim on their website that it has been independently certified. I understand that this is not enough for you and you need nothing less than a certificate from God himself [ BTW the "venerable" umpires are arbitrarily exempted from this requirement ] but thats something we have already beaten to death elsewhere. But if you have any intellectual honesty either show errors to back up your case or kindly stop this nonsense which is based on peurile and inane reasons.

Finally you have come out and said it. You dont have to prove anything. Yet you want others to prove you wrong. How pray is that possible? Even feasible? :) You who are so besotten by numbers dont care twice to check Hawkeye's numbers or analyze what they mean? Or how they came by their error percentages and how valid they are in real match conditions? How does that work? This is something you have NEVER ever answered in our conversations. Intellectual honesty? I am not sure how honesty is to be attached to intellect. :) More often it is attached to character. Again those are big words, Bossbhai. And I would not touch upon character in an internet forum. Touchy subject at best and all that you know :). Keep watching and you may see. For the record, I believe Hawkeye was wrong in Ponting's case. Moving forward, lets see what else comes up.

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[thevortex]

Read the post again clearly. I said no such thing. All I said is that since Iam not the inventor of H/E its natural that I dont have the data that you are asking. Meaning Iam not the "contractor". But my position is that of a bystander who can see the road system in operation and who isnt going to trust absolutely anything other than his eyes and his brains. So if there are no dead bodies there isnt a case. Whereas we have this alternate road system that kills ( i.e saws of a batsman or screws a deserving bowler ) on a Daily basis. Thats the End of story. Is that Clear enough or you need even further breakdown in the interest of leaving nothing to your fertile imagination ? Your position is that of a bystander that requires a certificate from God regardless of what your eyes are telling you. But you also have the cheek to tell me that this certification business isnt applicable to the existing road system (i.e the Human Umpires) . You simply have no grounds in that regard that is grounded on logic and fair play. Further more you have already said if this certificate were to be made available ( as is said by Paul Hawkins) you will then need a certificate on the authority that is providing the certificate !! So in short there is no end to this nonsense and is merely a excuse to argue for the sake of arguing. And reg honesty etc ... its Very simple. If you are going to claim something to be very erroneous then it is expected that you show some evidence to back it up. Else you will be labeled as dishonest. If you think you can simply proclaim to be correct well I can do the exact same thing too.

You started the story a little late, didnt you? And you are continuing to skirt the point which I am not in the mood to ignore right now :). Why do you support Hawkeye? Whither went your statistical nous? What happened to evidence then when you support Hawkeye? Or like you say your eye is to be trusted better than mine? Or Sachin Tendulkar's for that matter? Again I am keeping this very simple. Honesty - you can talk about that when you admit that Hawkeye does not have anything as regards scientific third party verification. Start with that and then we can move forward.

I dont work for H/E nor do I have access to their systems. I thought that this little bit of information would be obvious as daylight after all the gazillion posts that I have made on this topic. Let me break this down some more .... I trust my own eyes and brains more than any freakin "Independent 3rd party". I know my cricket and my vision is 20/20 and my IQ is up there and the success or failure of H/E has no bearing on me personally and financially ( meaning I have no vested interests in the success/failure of H/E ) . My only vested interest here is pure umpiring and for that like I said I trust none other than me. Now all this has been conveyed before and most here have figured that out except ofcourse you which is a telling indicator of what your intentions are. i.e you argue for the sake of it.

Oh but your posts dont make that very clear. A bystander can be excused for mistaking you to be the inventory of Hawkeye really :). Your eyes and brains again, Bossbhai :). This has become beyond ridiculous. You start out by spouting words like science and evidence. Now you are regressing to your own eyes and brains? Seriously how does that work? If your eyes and brains are evidence of Hawkeye working then why in the whole wide world are you not able to accept that others' eyes and brains are evidence of Hawkeye's not working? Makes sense, does it not? And this should put an end to all this posturing about science, statistics, evidence and honesty, right? Hopefully...

[thevortex]

And I forgot to underline this point - you or for that matter Hawkeye's inventor does not have any concrete, scientific, third party evidence of Hawkeye's absolute infallibility in match conditions. Do you accept that as a fact? A simple yes or no would do.

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[thevortex]

are you suggesting that Iam capable of cheating myself when I trust only my own eyes and brain .... hence I should rely on this "Independent 3rd Party" ?

Not in the least, man. I am just asking you to wake up to the possibility that there are other human beings on this planet as well and they too have eyes and brains. As simple as that. And quit calling your eyes and brains as scientific evidence. That is my point.