Jump to content

Agreement on DRS: Hot Spot is mandatory, Hawkeye is not


Recommended Posts

Posted

BCCI....& ICC...are 2 bodies without common sense. Not making hackeye mandatory for DRS will make more blunders....& Dhoni will come out with big stupid statements like adultaration of technology etc etc. Hot spot, sniko & hawk eye....combine 3 & we have very few errors if any. But no....there has to be confusion & resuting bad decisions..so that everybody can blame others for their own failures.

Posted
:hysterical: :hysterical: :hysterical: Wasnt you who brought Sachins name and our world cup victory on this thread.
Sachins name regarding the UDRS decision. You know that pretty well.
Posted
All these doubts may seem like splitting hairs, complicating the game, but complicate is exactly what DRS in its current form does. The original purpose of the system wasn't to predict whether the ball would have clipped the leg bail. Its purpose was to spot edges (or their absence), balls pitched outside leg and balls hitting the batsman outside off when offering a shot for lbws. It was introduced for umpires who have trouble grasping basic umpiring rules, and for the odd big mistake made by the good officials. It wasn't meant to be a contest between Ian Gould reckoning that the offbreak would have hit leg stump and Hawk Eye's prediction that it would have missed it by centimetres.
-Sidharth Monga Mr. Monga has provided the best explanation imo regarding the greyness associated with Haywk-eye and Virtual Eye to judge LBWs. There is reason FIFA is also vehemently against Hawk-eye for goal line decisions. Their statement prior to South Africa WC 2010: "No matter which technology is applied, at the end of the day a decision will have to be taken by a human being. This being the case, why remove the responsibility from the referee to give it to someone else? It is often the case that, even after a slow-motion replay, ten different experts will have ten different opinions on what the decision should have been." Hawkeye is nothing more than a subjective thought process of someone's perception and prediction of ball trajectory. It will never achieve 100% accuracy compared to Hotspot.
Posted

Hwakeye for line predicting the trajectory of the ball is debatable , but why can't it be used for 1) To check whether ball has pitched leg-side ( using mat) 2) Point of impact ( whether in line to the stump) At least no one says these are not 100%.

Posted
Hwakeye for line predicting the trajectory of the ball is debatable , but why can't it be used for 1) To check whether ball has pitched leg-side ( using mat) 2) Point of impact ( whether in line to the stump) At least no one says these are not 100%.
why do we need hawkeye for determining if the ball pitched outside leg stump?
Posted
why do we need hawkeye for determining if the ball pitched outside leg stump?
Agree, Current camera angles provide enough information for the third umpire to convey where the ball pitched and height at impact. A "mat" and a "transparent" batsman's figure would prove useful to see where the stumps are.
Posted
why do we even need hawkeye to for the point of impact?? The extrapolation starts from the point of impact anyways.
The ball is tracked by a set of cameras to predict the path even before impact. After impact, the prediction software will show how the ball might have travelled. We need Hakeye to show the path before impact. We can't rely on 2D view of the cameras to see the angle, height and speed to correctly judge the flight the of the ball with naked eye.

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...