maaki Posted March 30, 2011 Posted March 30, 2011 Real time and in replays it looked out to me.. The udrs showed the ball barely missing.. It worked to our advantage but to me it was a clear example of how uncertain the prediction system is.. Do u guys agree?
Online Posted March 30, 2011 Posted March 30, 2011 it was a very welcome and pleasant surprise. I thought it looked out
vvvslaxman Posted March 30, 2011 Posted March 30, 2011 Same way Viru's dismissal looked dodgy as i originally thought it was pitched outside the leg stump in real time. Also bounce prediction was also suspicious.
flamy Posted March 30, 2011 Posted March 30, 2011 Man, watching that live two words were reverberating in my head Poetic Justice. :yay:
Cricket Tragic Posted March 30, 2011 Posted March 30, 2011 Yeah, I've seen this happen a few times. Swann appeared to have the batsman in front but it predicted huge turn to miss the stumps. Never really liked the system either way.
Asim Posted March 30, 2011 Posted March 30, 2011 YES, not because it went against us but in real time with naked eye it will be given 9/10 times OUT but after watching replays it will be given OUT 10/10 times... Usually this Hawk-eye technology generates very much accurate looking trajectory but this one was a huge surprise... But I am sure technology-providers might not guarantee 100% accuracy...
Raghav_12 Posted March 30, 2011 Posted March 30, 2011 Well, ideally UDRS is not there overturn the marginal decisions like the one of Sachin Tendulkar in this match. UDRS is supposed to be there for the howlers like the one Thorpe had got against Srinath in 99 world cup (where he was given LBW when ball would have hit 7th or 8th stump) I am not saying that it was out or not out. My poiint is either way video evidences were not strong enough to overtrun whatever ground umpires had decided. But then I am talking about basic premise of UDRS as a system. In practical, it has to be implemented with some well defined rules and fortunately in today's match Sachin benefitted from these rules.
Raghav_12 Posted March 30, 2011 Posted March 30, 2011 YES' date= not because it went against us but in real time with naked eye it will be given 9/10 times OUT but after watching replays it will be given OUT 10/10 times...Usually this Hawk-eye technology generates very much accurate looking trajectory but this one was a huge surprise... But I am sure technology-providers might not guarantee 100% accuracy... I hope here you meant, replays without hawk-eye predictions?
Asim Posted March 30, 2011 Posted March 30, 2011 I hope here you meant' date=' replays without hawk-eye predictions?[/quote'] No, actually without Hawk-eye... Just simple replays... With Hawk-eye ofcourse we got to follow the technology generated trajectory...
putrevus Posted March 30, 2011 Posted March 30, 2011 Viru's dismissal and its predicted path I felt was wrong. If you see the replay again he instantly opts for review thinking he hopped to play that ball and it should miss the stumps. Taufel is good umpire so he must have got it right.
IKnowU Posted March 30, 2011 Posted March 30, 2011 The ball was already turning a bit at the impact, the prediction was fair. If you look at it as a still picture it looks plumb, but you have factor in the spin as well and it a spun a bit. Still lucky though.
maaki Posted March 30, 2011 Author Posted March 30, 2011 To me it could have been anyone of miscalibration, purposeful human error on the part of person manning the udrs system , a bug in the system or the range of uncertainty of the system there are a couple things hopefully icc has controlled for udrs 1> who mans the system , basically this is should be a neutral person 2> Who calibrates the cameras.. hopefully it is a neutral party.. Some of my friends were joking that Bangalore won us the match by bugging the software..
Raghav_12 Posted March 30, 2011 Posted March 30, 2011 No, actually without Hawk-eye... Just simple replays... With Hawk-eye ofcourse we got to follow the technology generated trajectory... That's what I told "replays without hawk-eye predictions":dontknow:
yoda Posted March 30, 2011 Posted March 30, 2011 Ball was turning as it hit the pads, so I will go with HK on that one, although it did look out in full speed.
vvvslaxman Posted March 30, 2011 Posted March 30, 2011 This is not the first time we see this. This won't be the last time either. Remember how India was done in by UDRS in srilanka one of the reason why Indians are reluctant to use this technology.
coffee_rules Posted March 30, 2011 Posted March 30, 2011 The damned zionist software developers...they were all from Infosys...
Raghav_12 Posted March 30, 2011 Posted March 30, 2011 I very much liked that UDRS gave a life to Sachin today and not saying that Sachin should have been given out there. But how many of us think that, this case warranted an overturning through UDRS? IMHO, If you consider spirit of UDRS, this overturning was against that.
vvvslaxman Posted March 30, 2011 Posted March 30, 2011 I very much liked that UDRS gave a life to Sachin today and not saying that Sachin should have been given out there. But how many of us think that' date=' this case warranted an overturning through UDRS? IMHO, If you consider spirit of UDRS, this overturning was against that.[/quote'] They have couple of hard and fast rules which is okay for the moment. Pitched out the line. Straightaway not out. Not hitting the stump . Straightaway not out.
Anakin Posted March 30, 2011 Posted March 30, 2011 SRT knew right away the ball was spinning too much and indicated that to GG. Not sure what's the fuss. Technology is there to get rid of situations just like this when it looks out by naked eyes, but there's more to it.
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