Was Hawk Eye representation of Ponting's dismissal accurate?

[thevortex]

Where are the dead bodies Mr. Watson ?

Pehle aap, sir! Because if not for plans and evidence you ought not to be allowed to build that system in the first place. Hawkeye I mean. And this part is real simple to understand, I promise. If somebody wants to change the entire way things are being done for centuries then they have to bring in the evidence. And let me repeat, it is not upto others to disprove. It is upto the technology, the proponents thereof and the fanatical fans thereof to prove its worth, accuracy and reliability consistently.

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[thevortex]

lol ... you were the one that were crying bloody murder in your article ... without a dead body there aint going to be even a murder case lodged forget about hearing. So where is the dead body ?

And you were the one who admitted that you supported Hawkeye even before that article. I gather you must have some basis for that, right? So evidence please... I had my basis and it was explained therein. I still dont agree with that Strauss dismissal.

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[thevortex]

I showed you examples from clean bowled. I showed you majority opinion thru 2 different polls. That is hardly a Bucknoresque howler by your own admission in any case you were the only one in this forum that didnt because you are utterly biased against H/E.

So the next time I express an opinion, I will probably PM a few members and ask them to come out in support of me? Is that how it works in this forum? Get over it, Bossbhai. You dont have evidence. Neither does Hawkeye. So why are you trying so hard? It need not be a Bucknoresque howler. It is a howler nonetheless. In implementation as well as in result.

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[thevortex]

lowering the bar are we ehh ? ok so where are these semi-Bucknoresque howlers that only exist in your memory that you are so shy of revealing ? Why dont you simply come out and present them and end this nonsense ? Could it possibly be that you have jack ?

I am giving them as I see them, Bossbhai. You on the other hand have to come out and accept that there is no evidence. Scientific or otherwise. For Hawkeye and its implementation in the game, I mean.

[TumTum]

Yes it was. If you look closely at Hotspot again, you will see that the white spot on Ponting's leg actually moved after it him because he was moving forward. Can't see a problem with H/E. But I will say that once I saw H/E being completely incorrect, it was in a game in NZ and the commentators spotted it, I think they said H/E was faulty then.

[Mamu]

HawkEye Might be right, Haweye might be wrong, but one thing is for sure -- It will consistently give the same decision for the same ball !!!!!!!!!!! Unlike the fecking umpires -- who probably will end up screwing it up. This reason in itself -- make me choose hawkeye over a Asoka De Silva or for that matter any umpire in the panel -- right now !

[CSK Fan]

Thanks for the clue. Now, see if you can find the footage with the Hot Spot representation. I am sure that will show you something which might come as a potential surprise if you still have an open mind.

I did see that footage. All it shows is the point of impact at one point of time, which 'seems' to be at a different frame than hawk eye's most likely because of footage from different camera angles

[thevortex]

I did see that footage. All it shows is the point of impact at one point of time' date=' which 'seems' to be at a different frame than hawk eye's most likely because of footage from different camera angles[/quote'] And pray how did you deduce this bit of information? That it is 'most likely because of footage from different camera angles'? I have never understood this rabid defense of Hawkeye. Let them put all the numbers on the table. Keep it completely transparent. Why in the world should we accomodate them? Remember it is business for them! And before Bossbhai jumps in and says my attack on Hawkeye is equally rabid, I must point out that I am just saying the truth. There is no independent verification done on Hawkeye. And there exists considerable doubt among cricketing circles regarding the implementation and veracity of the entire system. Enough said.

[thevortex]

So, the 'No' and 'Not sure' crowd is greater than the crowd which says 'Hawkeye can make no mistake'! Interesting.

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[CSK Fan]

And pray how did you deduce this bit of information? That it is 'most likely because of footage from different camera angles'? .

Arent H/E cameras different?

[Jersey #10]

any linkies?

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[thevortex]

Proff. this is why you should never have a poll with 3 options ... especially when the 3rd option is Notsure + DontCare :headshake: :--D But seriously speaking I cant understand why people think this is plumb. Things to consider here are : 1. Slope 2. Angle at which the ball is comming in. 3. Pontings huge stride 4. He moves inside the line after impact making it look plumb. Unless you say that the H/E website is blatantly lying when it says that such a verification was indeed done( yes I know the results are not published but that doesnt mean that there wasnt a test at all) . We have been thru this how many times now ?

Ponting's huge stride? Really? Would you be interested to see how many think that Ponting took a huge stride? :) It is not for Hawkeye to certify its products. Do you expect a manufacturer to trash his creation? When will you get realistic? If it talks about verification, are we to assume that it is verified? I dont understand what kind of scientific temperament is that! Lets have the proof on the table.

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --