HowardRoark Posted February 28, 2011 Posted February 28, 2011 Can someone add "Pak" to his username? Becoz that username will sound familiar to everyone and they won't take him seriously. What makes you think I am from Pakistan because i dared to disagree Because your English is not good enough to assume that you are an English fan and that leaves only a Paki fan who would go to any distance to prove that Bell was not out or' date=' in other words, India's POV is wrong.[/quote'] WHAT A LOSER! This guy made this exact thread on PP. Word for word. http://www.**********.net/ppforum/showthread.php?t=120421 In the thread on PP, he wrote in the end "Why are Indians complaining about this" and here he writes "why is everyone complaining about it" Hello Usman_sheikh, did not expect to get exposed so soon? :hysterical:
Passion Posted February 28, 2011 Posted February 28, 2011 This is what happens when technology steps all over sport. They have a legitimate system in place to help correct decisions but throw in some other krap to overcomplicate things and go completely against the purpose of UDRS in the first place. If you're going to get a ruler out and measure hypothetical distances then why have umpires in the first place? Are you just gonna rant or bring your suggestion forward. What should be the law?
asterix Posted February 28, 2011 Posted February 28, 2011 Oh Uzi Boy.. The one who goes by another handle, "Neutral"..Well I knew he is on one hell of a "Passionate" mission..
Passion Posted February 28, 2011 Posted February 28, 2011 Hello Usman_sheikh' date=' did not expect to get exposed so soon? :hysterical:[/quote'] Great IT skills. Hats off to you. Lol:--D
Zap_Brannigan Posted February 28, 2011 Posted February 28, 2011 Billy bowden doesn't have common sense. Neither does these "passion"ate fans. Yesterday we had a couple of fans telling us it cannot be given out because it pitched outside offstump.
Passion Posted February 28, 2011 Posted February 28, 2011 Oh Uzi Boy.. The one who goes by another handle' date=' "Neutral"..Well I knew he is on one hell of a "Passionate" mission..[/quote'] Dont worry, i am sure you guyz can bear me till the worldcup. :--D
debachat Posted February 28, 2011 Author Posted February 28, 2011 Problem is on one hand hawk eye is saying the ball is going to hit the middle of middle, on the other hand it is telling the umpire that its not sure since the ball is 2.5m away. That is the source of confusion. Either the hawk eye should not depend on the trajectory of the ball or it should not depend on other details such as pitching in line, hitting in line, hitting the wicket, distance from the wicket etc. If it does both then its going to lead to confusion. If the trajectory was not sure why did it show the ball to be hitting the middle of the middle. If there was a doubt why did it not just give the data points to the umpires and let them make the decision.
asterix Posted February 28, 2011 Posted February 28, 2011 Dont worry' date=' i am sure you guyz can bear me till the worldcup. :--D[/quote'] How was that IT skill for you? :hatsoff:
Passion Posted February 28, 2011 Posted February 28, 2011 Problem is on one hand hawk eye is saying the ball is going to hit the middle of middle, on the other hand it is telling the umpire that its not sure since the ball is 2.5m away. That is the source of confusion. Either the hawk eye should not depend on the trajectory of the ball or it should not depend on other details such as pitching in line, hitting in line, hitting the wicket, distance from the wicket etc. If it does both then its going to lead to confusion. If the trajectory was not sure why did it show the ball to be hitting the middle of the middle. If there was a doubt why did it not just give the data points to the umpires and let them make the decision. Again what is your actual suggestion. What should be the law?
Passion Posted February 28, 2011 Posted February 28, 2011 How was that IT skill for you? :hatsoff: You need to do more work on this. I ll give you 8 out of ten and a shinning star.
HowardRoark Posted February 28, 2011 Posted February 28, 2011 Great IT skills. Hats off to you. Lol:--D Thank you, but no thank you, we have a different definition for IT skills in India :--D
asterix Posted February 28, 2011 Posted February 28, 2011 You need to do more work on this. I ll give you 8 out of ten Don't worry, the remaining marks you'll get from the Admins and Mods of this forum..:two_thumbs_up: I'm pretty sure Admins BAN members using multiple IDs here. Passion, Neutral and what else..
riwi999 Posted February 28, 2011 Posted February 28, 2011 The problem is not Hawkeye. It gives its projected trajectory, it also tells the umpire the distance to allow the umpire to factor in an element, if he finds the trajectory to be a borderline case. In this instance, it was not a borderline case, so the 2.5m should be irrelevant for the decision-making. But if Bowden has his head stuck in the sand, let's not blame the technology or the UDRS for it. It is Billy Bowden to whom attention needs to be drawn here. Not the technology. But then, needless to mention, nothing will be done about him. ICC umpires being endangered species handled with kids' gloves and all that.
satyam1729 Posted February 28, 2011 Posted February 28, 2011 Don't worry, the remaining marks you'll get from the Admins and Mods of this forum..:two_thumbs_up: I'm pretty sure Admins BAN members using multiple IDs here. Passion, Neutral and what else.. :hysterical::hysterical:
Passion Posted February 28, 2011 Posted February 28, 2011 Don't worry, the remaining marks you'll get from the Admins and Mods of this forum..:two_thumbs_up: I'm pretty sure Admins BAN members using multiple IDs here. Passion, Neutral and what else.. hmmmm. I might get away because i only have one active ID.
Passion Posted February 28, 2011 Posted February 28, 2011 The problem is not Hawkeye. It gives its projected trajectory, it also tells the umpire the distance to allow the umpire to factor in an element, if he finds the trajectory to be a borderline case. In this instance, it was not a borderline case, so the 2.5m should be irrelevant for the decision-making. But if Bowden has his head stuck in the sand, let's not blame the technology or the UDRS for it. It is Billy Bowden to whom attention needs to be drawn here. Not the technology. But then, needless to mention, nothing will be done about him. ICC umpires being endangered species handled with kids' gloves and all that. Problem identified. Awaiting your suggestion?
debachat Posted February 28, 2011 Author Posted February 28, 2011 Hawk-eye issue Again what is your actual suggestion. What should be the law? You do need it spoon fed - dont you? Here is one more time - Either Dont calculate the ball trajectory and show it to a billion people and make yourself look stupid. Or Dont Show All the data points that go into making the trajectory (hitting in line, pitched in line etc etc.). Let the umpire be given the guideline for everything. Helps? Point being dont contradict your technology by mixing human judgement. If umpires have to judge the trajectory based on how far the ball is from the wicket then no one needs UDRS.
Passion Posted February 28, 2011 Posted February 28, 2011 :hysterical::hysterical: Hysterical laughing can make your pants wet. BBC research
vvvslaxman Posted February 28, 2011 Posted February 28, 2011 One question, YES it was hitting middle stump but he was far down the pitch and benefit of doubt must go to batsman unless billy was hundred percent about the trajectory of the ball. Do you even understand what lbw is? Are you seriously saying that we should get rid of benefit of doubt? I smell prejudice here Nasser Hussain, Botham, Atherton, Gavaskar are idiots You are the only genius here.
satyam1729 Posted February 28, 2011 Posted February 28, 2011 Hysterical laughing can make your pants wet. BBC research BBC does research like this ? :haha::haha:
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now