Passion Posted February 28, 2011 Posted February 28, 2011 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. Extremely vague and confusing Suggestion. What should be the actual law. Three or four sentences which should actually appear in ICC laws of cricket. I have typed in mine, and please no waffling
riwi999 Posted February 28, 2011 Posted February 28, 2011 Suggestion: If everything is pointing to red AND the ball is projected to hit middle (or lower) of middle, then ignore distance element. Whether 2.5 or 3.5 or 4.5, it really does not matter. The ball would be going on to hit the stumps anyway.
Passion Posted February 28, 2011 Posted February 28, 2011 Nasser Hussain' date=' Botham, Atherton, Gavaskar are idiots You are the only genius here.[/quote'] I am so glad we cleared this out
VRV Singh Posted February 28, 2011 Posted February 28, 2011 Are you just gonna rant or bring your suggestion forward. What should be the law? It's not the law. It's the application of it when technology's involved. The umpiring team are too ready to overlook common sense when in 99 cases out of 100 not involving UDRS, it would be a straightforward plumb lbw. This new fad about distances is just bizarre, especially if it's not one of the four main criteria. The element about distance (e.g. 2.5 metres) should be completely removed from the technological equation. It is not even a proper law in that respect anyway!
ali0786 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.. I feel sorry for this kid..he has to pose as someone else to speak his mind..:hysterical:
Passion Posted February 28, 2011 Posted February 28, 2011 Suggestion: If everything is pointing to red AND the ball is projected to hit middle (or lower) of middle, then ignore distance element. Whether 2.5 or 3.5 or 4.5, it really does not matter. The ball would be going on to hit the stumps anyway. You actually wanna change laws of cricket. If some one use his feet against the spinner and is half way down the pitch, it can actually be given out lbw. Wow. You are a genius dude
vvvslaxman Posted February 28, 2011 Posted February 28, 2011 I am so glad we cleared this out You couldn't discern sarcasm.. you are discerning umpiring decision. WTG buddy.. By the way nobody has agreed with you in this thread except yourself. May be you ought bring in more pakistani friends.
Passion Posted February 28, 2011 Posted February 28, 2011 I feel sorry for this kid..he has to pose as someone else to speak his mind..:hysterical: I thought you would understand of all people because you too have to pose as someone else to speak your mind B->
debachat Posted February 28, 2011 Author Posted February 28, 2011 You actually wanna change laws of cricket. If some one use his feet against the spinner and is half way down the pitch' date=' it can actually be given out lbw. Wow. You are a genius dude[/quote'] And you are not getting it buddy! You dont see or refuse to see what is wrong. Thinking about this a little bit before jumping into a 100m sprint for posting responses may help!
riwi999 Posted February 28, 2011 Posted February 28, 2011 You actually wanna change laws of cricket. If some one use his feet against the spinner and is half way down the pitch' date=' it can actually be given out lbw. Wow. You are a genius dude[/quote'] Thank you. But not genius enough apparently. Otherwise I would not be discussing with you in the first place. I am amazed that trolls like you are allowed to operate here.
ali0786 Posted February 28, 2011 Posted February 28, 2011 I thought you would understand of all people because you too have to pose as someone else to speak your mind B-> What an Idiot. That does not even make sense. I have always supported Pak here in every thread and I'm not ashamed to admit I'm a Pakistani unlike you.
debachat Posted February 28, 2011 Author Posted February 28, 2011 Neither does these "passion"ate fans. Yesterday we had a couple of fans telling us it cannot be given out because it pitched outside offside. Yeah - these are the smart cookies who think they know it all and will be the first to cry when something like this goes against their teams!
Passion Posted February 28, 2011 Posted February 28, 2011 You couldn't discern sarcasm.. you are discerning umpiring decision. WTG buddy.. By the way nobody has agreed with you in this thread except yourself. May be you ought bring in more pakistani friends. Well nobody agreed with me when i criticized current worldcup format last year, and then every one who disagreed with me actually agreed with me this year. Dont blame me for letting your prejudice get better of you. I will stand by this law even if my own teams lose worldcup final because of this law because i believe this is the right law. But i can guarantee you that you will also agree with this law if india wins worldcup final because of this law. In my dictionary, it is hypocrisy
Zap_Brannigan Posted February 28, 2011 Posted February 28, 2011 Well nobody agreed with me when i criticized current worldcup format last year' date=' and then every one who disagreed with me actually agreed with me this year. Dont blame me for letting your prejudice get better of you. I will stand by this law even if my own teams lose worldcup final because of this law because i believe this is the right law. But i can guarantee you that you will also agree with this law if india wins worldcup final because of this law. In my dictionary, it is hypocrisy[/quote'] Did you support Inzi walking off in England when they were accused of ball tampering?
Passion Posted February 28, 2011 Posted February 28, 2011 Did you support Inzi walking off in England when they were accused of ball tampering? Hell no. Like i said before my principles always come first. Inzi should have protested but only after the match
Zap_Brannigan Posted February 28, 2011 Posted February 28, 2011 Hell no. Like i said before my principles always come first. Inzi should have protested but only after the match Although it's nice to meet a passion fan who didn't agree with Inzi, Did you know that if the law werent changed in the last decade or so, Inzi wouldn't even have a chance of protesting or even speaking out to the umpire? Basically, after the game, ICC would have had to term Pakistan team Ball tamperers and ban everyone involved. So you thank the change of law that made it possible to make a protest possible.
Kriterion Posted February 28, 2011 Posted February 28, 2011 i thought the point of UDRS was to make the right call, in so much as it can be determined by technology. it ain't perfect, but its a good system with a few flaws. the one thing that needs to be decided is do we accept the technology as final say? we should, because thats the whole reason for bringing it in. in this case, no batsman should not get benefit of the doubt, because the hawkeye shows there is no doubt...it was hitting the stumps. bell should have been given out regardless of what the original on field decision was. thats why we have the UDRS.
vvvslaxman Posted February 28, 2011 Posted February 28, 2011 Well nobody agreed with me when i criticized current worldcup format last year' date=' and then every one who disagreed with me actually agreed with me this year. Dont blame me for letting your prejudice get better of you I will stand by this law even if my own teams lose worldcup final because of this law because i believe this is the right law.[b'] But i can guarantee you that you will also agree with this law if india wins worldcup final because of this law. In my dictionary, it is hypocrisy Are you a mind reader? How do you know what i would agree or disagree if that happens for us? Let me throw that back in your face.. if it happens to your team you would not agree... prove me wrong.
Passion Posted February 28, 2011 Posted February 28, 2011 i thought the point of UDRS was to make the right call, in so much as it can be determined by technology. it ain't perfect, but its a good system with a few flaws. the one thing that needs to be decided is do we accept the technology as final say? we should, because thats the whole reason for bringing it in. in this case, no batsman should not get benefit of the doubt, because the hawkeye shows there is no doubt...it was hitting the stumps. bell should have been given out regardless of what the original on field decision was. thats why we have the UDRS. benefit of doubt is part of lbw laws. We shouldnt change cricket laws just because we have the technology. Again this is what the law should be If a batsman is more than 2.7 meters down the pitch, it should be given not out unless umpire is sure about the trajectory of the ball. And if you refer it, umpire original decision should stand.
vvvslaxman Posted February 28, 2011 Posted February 28, 2011 Bell declared himself out after he saw the replay and started walking off.
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