Tendulkar shoulder before wicket....

[Anakin]

It was meant to be a joke, so take it easy. And unfortunately I have no purpose in that dismissal in case you want to know. Thirdly, it was NOT falling. We can keep repeating it for ever, it'll just be a waste of time. At best the ball straightened very slightly (from sideview), and with the bounce in the pitch it'd be going easily over the top. But that is not falling by any means.

[The Outsider]

2. Balls that are pitched short (ie, in your half of the pitch as it was in McGrath's that delivery's case) register atleast 5-10 kph faster (on average) than fuller-balls. Yes, that is a glitch in the speed guaging technology but thats how it goes. So even if your speed reading is right, the real speed of the delivery would be 120-125kph, which is a VERY SLOW ball for one that is bowled short.McGrath bowls usually in the 130kph range and a short ball isnt normally going to be slower than his average speed.

It's actually the opposite. Short balls register slower than full length balls. Go to youtube, and watch an over or so from any bowler you'll see it for yourself. And since you have obviously made up your mind that the decision had no doubt in it there is no point discussing it further.

[CC1981]

At best the ball straightened very slightly (from sideview), and with the bounce in the pitch it'd be going easily over the top

False.

[CC1981]

Short balls register slower than full length balls.

False. We arnt talking about a short-ball vs a full toss or a yorker, we are talking about a short ball vs a fullish ball. In the scenario presented, a short ball is going to register a faster speed than a fullish ball because of the dynamics of a speed gun involved.

Go to youtube, and watch an over or so from any bowler you'll see it for yourself.

I have but i do not need to. I am telling you from a position that knows everything there is to know about speed guns. Really, its nothing more than an electronic gadget that i've picked apart before piece by piece and re-constructed. Not that hard thing to do in my field of work.

[Ram]

Its not a question of whether the ball would have hit the stumps or not. Its a question of - How could the umpire have decided with certainty that ,indeed it would have gone on to hit the stumps. Its not often that an umpire gets to to see balls hitting the shoulder. There is no way , his system would be having the expertise to adjudicate on that one. For eg - An umpire knows the ball hitting just below the knee roll will most probably go on to hit the stumps, but one hitting the thigh will miss it. This is in his memory bank , a guide to his decision making. But surely , noone can say with certainty , if a ball ( even if it kept low ) hitting the shoulder of a batsman is going to hit the stumps or not. That ball may have still gone on and clipped top of off , but that is one bad piece of umpiring , coming from one plucky umpire.

[Holysmoke]

2. Balls that are pitched short (ie, in your half of the pitch as it was in McGrath's that delivery's case) register atleast 5-10 kph faster (on average) than fuller-balls. Yes, that is a glitch in the speed guaging technology but thats how it goes.(I am not exactly inclined to explain to you how a speed gun works because of its tedious nature but lets just say, it happens to be a topic in my field of expertese, so you can take my word for it). So even if your speed reading is right, the real speed of the delivery would be 120-125kph, which is a VERY SLOW ball for one that is bowled short.McGrath bowls usually in the 130kph range and a short ball isnt normally going to be slower than his average speed.

That is total bs. Full tosses and overpitched balls are shown faster, and short balls are shown slower. CC, your argument is BS. the ball was not a falling, and im not the only one on this thread saying that. anyways, no point arguing with you... you're never gonna admit you made a mistake, etc, so im gonna be out of this thread... but i will still read the reply that you will post while trying to justify that short balls are shown faster on speed guns....:finger: anyways, if we are still arguing after watching it with the help of technology, then theres no way the umpire cudve decided. benefit of doubt goes to batsman. ie not out. case closed.

[CC1981]

Full tosses and overpitched balls are shown faster, and short balls are shown slower.

I am comparing short balls with good-length deliveries - short ball is always faster registered. I categorically mentioned that i am not talking about yorkers/full tosses here.

the ball was not a falling, and im not the only one on this thread saying that.

It very clearly is falling in the side-on slow motion replay.

[CC1981]

Its a question of - How could the umpire have decided with certainty that ,indeed it would have gone on to hit the stumps. Its not often that an umpire gets to to see balls hitting the shoulder. There is no way , his system would be having the expertise to adjudicate on that one. For eg - An umpire knows the ball hitting just below the knee roll will most probably go on to hit the stumps, but one hitting the thigh will miss it. This is in his memory bank , a guide to his decision making.

Decision-making is not 100.00% about memory or else there would be no correct decision in an unsusual circumstance. It is not just about hitting the knee roll or below it will most probably hit the stumps- the height of the batsman, whether the ball will bounce OVER the stumps or not etc. ALL factor in. Tendulkar was out because the umpire could make out that the ball is falling, it is going on to hit the wicket, it did not hit the bat or the glove and Tendulkar is not offering a shot. Ie, it is CLEARLY out.

[Ram]

Decision-making is not 100.00% about memory or else there would be no correct decision in an unsusual circumstance. It is not just about hitting the knee roll or below it will most probably hit the stumps- the height of the batsman, whether the ball will bounce OVER the stumps or not etc. ALL factor in. Tendulkar was out because the umpire could make out that the ball is falling, it is going on to hit the wicket, it did not hit the bat or the glove and Tendulkar is not offering a shot. Ie, it is CLEARLY out.

This is not logic. Its about system of umpiring. First question - Have you umpired in a semi-professional environment ? I have , and i do have some systems/checks and balances in place , that help me make least number of errors. There are certain impact points that i look for , that help me to narrow down the possibilities. if an umpire is going to call EVERY decision based on ONLY what he sees on that spot , 1 in 2 decisions will be wrong.

[Holysmoke]

I am comparing short balls with good-length deliveries - short ball is always faster registered.

no. thats a load of tosh. Does anyone on ICF, other than cc, believe in that?

It very clearly is falling in the side-on slow motion replay.

Either everyone on this thread is blind, or you are.You decide.

[Anakin]

False.

I say false back :haha:

[Holysmoke]

sWFJNZwgf3c

[CC1981]

if an umpire is going to call EVERY decision based on ONLY what he sees on that spot , 1 in 2 decisions will be wrong.

Which they are in case of lbw calls. Even 'best of the best' umpires screw up 1 in 3/1 in 4 lbw calls. This is a low % job to begin with.

I have , and i do have some systems/checks and balances in place , that help me make least number of errors

I know- but if you are not factoring in the rising/falling nature of the delivery and you cannot judge that based on which part of the body it is hitting, you are not a very good umpire then. As i said, the umpire's POV is pretty simple - Tendy did not offer a shot- ball is in line with stumps, ball is falling and hits him on the shoulder- the shoulder which is at most 1-2 cm above stump level & a few feet from the stumps laterally. With the falling aspect of the ball in mind, it is most definitely out.

[CC1981]

sWFJNZwgf3c

Thats quiete an extreme definition of the word 'slow motion replay'. :haha:

[Holysmoke]

Thats quiete an extreme definition of the word 'slow motion replay'. :haha:

Yea, posted it so that you might be able to see the whole thing properly, as compared to the other slow motion replay.. where they pause the replay a second AFTER the ball hits sachin on the shoulder, while it is falling to the ground AFTER IMPACT. anyways, i said it earlier too.. if we are still not sure what wouldve happenned(everyone except you, CC), then the benefit of doubt HAS to go to the batsman. that means not out.

[CC1981]

no. thats a load of tosh. Does anyone on ICF, other than cc, believe in that?

I don't care what you believe or what the entire flipping ICF believes on this. Unless there is someone else in here who knows the exact nature of the technology involved in speed guns, you or anyone else's opinion on this topic is irrelevant. As i said, i know exactly how these things work, what principle they are using and what their shortcommings are and why. Unless you can claim the same, i don't think you are in a position to debate this with me.

Either everyone on this thread is blind, or you are.You decide.

blindness by jingoism is a common affliction in India when it comes to cricket. Its a good thing i didnt spend too long a time in India at a stretch to be affected by this .

[CC1981]

where they pause the replay a second AFTER the ball hits sachin on the shoulder, while it is falling to the ground AFTER IMPACT.

They do that but that is irrelevent because the ball was on a falling trajectory anyways. What you posted is not a slow motion replay and neither is it repeated in a slow enough frame rate to reach a conclusion. Remember, the viewing perspective of these dismissals we are seeing is form a field away, NOT from 22 yards away. for us to debate this cogently, we need a video footage with slower framerate to it. Once slowed down enough, it is quite evident that the ball is falling, not rising.

[Ram]

. I know- but if you are not factoring in the rising/falling nature of the delivery and you cannot judge that based on which part of the body it is hitting, you are not a very good umpire then. As i said, the umpire's POV is pretty simple - Tendy did not offer a shot- ball is in line with stumps, ball is falling and hits him on the shoulder- the shoulder which is at most 1-2 cm above stump level & a few feet from the stumps laterally. With the falling aspect of the ball in mind, it is most definitely out.

You dont seem to understand what i am trying to say. Umpiring decisions are NOT well considered thoughts followed by a coherent decision. They are at most times , just instincts. But a good umpire will have a well-defined check-points that help him aid his instinct. There is NO way , an umpire would have had prior experience in judging lbw calls hitting the shoulder. That is uncharted territory for him. Its something he CANNOT judge , the first time.

[Holysmoke]

I don't care what you believe or what the entire flipping ICF believes on this. Unless there is someone else in here who knows the exact nature of the technology involved in speed guns, you or anyone else's opinion on this topic is irrelevant. As i said, i know exactly how these things work, what principle they are using and what their shortcommings are and why. Unless you can claim the same, i don't think you are in a position to debate this with me.

Why dont you explain the thing. Not the entire speedgun thing.. just the part which proves that short balls are registered faster on the speedo.. I am not an expert, but I do have the basic knowledge about speedguns, and my knowledge tells me that short balls are shown slower on speedguns, as compared to full balls. since you know "exactly" how these things work, could you elaborate?

[Anakin]

So did you slow down the fr? If so please post.