Tendulkar shoulder before wicket....

[Guest dada_rocks]

Ama basic kinematics fludi-dynamics & collision is anybody's field .. and yes u can take my word to the reserve bank of india

[dial_100]

SRT's stupidity... :hysterical::hysterical: Bekaar ki behas.... Abey you have played cricket for so many years.. Even trajectory of Kumble's delivery wont drop that quickly. Now we are talking about any thing above 65-70 mph. I am convinced and why the heck everyone of you need to know what I think...> If you have played cricket for long enuff then you would know it.... I have kept wkt for 4-5 years and I have observed the ball pitched on various surfaces and how much it bounces. Trouble is when we observe, its hard to say anything. we are so far away. And especially someone who claims to understand Technology so better than rest of us... we should rest this topic right there. Umpires make decisions in a split of second. I will give benefit of doubt to the umpire...:hysterical::hysterical:

[CC1981]

Things which impact average ball speed (1) Initial speed (2) Viscousity of environment in which ball move (3) Nature of surface i.e. type of collision ( extent of inelasticity ) (4) Length of the ball pitched Assuming initial speed remains same in case of short-pitched ball u will see a quantum reduction in speed after impact unless there is spring board instaleld in the pitch and collision somehow turns super-elastic. Decelration affected due to air-friction drag would not be much different throughout the trajectory. U can see it's logical for the short-pitched ball to have slower overall speed than fuller length ball.

Dude, drop the physics- move into engineering here. Fack what IS affecting the speed of the ball. That is not relevant here. As i said before, unless you pull a freaking phased array radar outta your ar$e, your radar speed guns in the field of play are NOT accurate. Whatever reading it gives, especially in the higher end of the spectrum, you can attach a (+/- 5 kph) range to it. This is simply because if you knew anything about radar (which fyi, i found quite interesting in class),you'd know that one of the biggest factors in radar is 'size of object in ratio to size of callibrated field of view'. That your ball is a tiny thing, that your radar's callibrated field of view is tiny ( you arnt using a military radar array here, you are using a thing the size of a toy!) and that it is not a phased array radar means your observation value WILL be erratic and error-prone. What is relevant here is what is the radar measuring and how it is doing so . Your physics postulation is right but it is pointless, because your radar gun is not using all those fundamentals in its measurement factor directly. It is using doppler effect, that too, from one input only. it also depends on where the radar is set up- whether the measurement is comming from midwicket or behind the player. Plus it depends on how the radar-gun is set up. If its callibrated to measure "from point of release to point of batsman", it will give yorkers a greater reading than good length balls but if it is callibrated to measure 'from point of release to point of impact', then the short ball will be the highest registered speed every single time, higher even than a fulltoss that thuds into the batsman. Simply because concepts such as 'sampling rate, error correction, time exposure' all factors in. And i know for a fact that speed guns used in speed measurements have no general consensus in their callibration, with point of release to point of impact being the sample space for speed calculation being the more common variety. And this is a proven fact, since in speed readings, bouncers are almost ALWAYS of higher value than good length balls or half volleys. But it comes to a lower value than yorkers & fulltosses. You guys can argue the physics behind the velocity of the ball all you want but it is irrelevant because all that matters here is wtf is the radar gun doing and what IT is basing its conclusions on and what the error there is.

[varun]

^^ @ Cricketics.. What about leg byes then :D

In the sport of cricket, a leg bye is a run scored by the batting team when the batsman has not hit the ball with his bat, but the ball has hit the batsman's body or protective gear.

By the way. Here are the official rules for LBW: http://www.lords.org/laws-and-spirit/laws-of-cricket/laws/law-36-leg-before-wicket,62,AR.html It doesn't mention hitting the "leg" anywhere, just "part of the person"

[Cricketics]

^^ @ Cricketics.. What about leg byes then :D By the way. Here are the official rules for LBW: http://www.lords.org/laws-and-spirit/laws-of-cricket/laws/law-36-leg-before-wicket,62,AR.html It doesn't mention hitting the "leg" anywhere, just "part of the person"

i knew someone will mention about leg byes.. well thatz another decision which is being happening since ages.. but this decision on sachin resulted in a dismissal, which shouldn't have been... see u can't give "glove before wicket" an out? can u?? they might not have mentioned on that mcc website but the term - Leg before wicket simply justifies that a ball hitting on leg only should be given out..

[varun]

i knew someone will mention about leg byes.. well thatz another decision which is being happening since ages.. but this decision on sachin resulted in a dismissal, which shouldn't have been... see u can't give "glove before wicket" an out? can u?? they might not have mentioned on that mcc website but the term - Leg before wicket simply justifies that a ball hitting on leg only should be given out..

Pehle hota tha Cricketics, abhi nahi hai (translation : That used to be then) The rules keep evolving, but the name of the dismissal won't change.. Accha for example.. if a tailender has to survive 3 balls to save the match, why won't he just sit in front of the stumps with all protective gear (and hiding his knees and legs with a bat) :DThat way he'll never be given lbw :P

[Guest dada_rocks]

I didn't mention measurement did I.. It's all poroven physical theory based analysis, lest u question those theories then the measurements corroborating those theories will come into play and then we will talk about engg.. Again,m easurement snags wud have come under question if any part of the analysis drew anything from the measured data which it doesn't.. Eventual average velocity depends on initial velocity.. No doubt whatsoever Frictional drag of air depending on its viscousity works as deccelrating factor.. No doubt whatsoever Any kind of collision (with a hard stationary body) at best cud provide elastic collision.. no doubt whatsoever again PS: Unless ball lands on seam where super-elastic collision could be envisioned I don't see any need of dwelling on any kind of engg-measurement here ...........

[Cricketics]

Pehle hota tha Cricketics' date=' abhi nahi hai ([i']translation : That used to be then) The rules keep evolving, but the name of the dismissal won't change.. Accha for example.. if a tailender has to survive 3 balls to save the match, why won't he just sit in front of the stumps with all protective gear (and hiding his knees and legs with a bat) :DThat way he'll never be given lbw :P

:hysterical: well thatz a good point from u to defend.. but see i can't stand a leg before decision being converted to shoulder before wicket..

[CC1981]

It's all poroven physical theory based analysis,

*sigh* This is why you speed guns are made by engineers, not physicists. As i said, your 'intial drag, coefficient of blah, root mean square of bleh' are fine anddandy. But, they have the classic case of 'looks good on paper' since it is utterly meaningless here. This is because what is relevant here is wtf is the radar gun doing and what it is processing to spit out the number it does . So in short, stop talking jack- your 'total physics analysis' is irrelevant here to the instrument used. And this is about the instrument, not about what God sees as XYZ's speed! I don't care what einstien's physics says on this- bottomline is and always will be tied to what the instrument (the radar gun) is doing and measuring. Period.

[Anakin]

Just wondering why their makers would lie.

[Gaurav]

I think that was not out. At best it was 50:50 in which case Sachin should get benefit of the doubt. As great CC is 100% sure that it was hitting the stumps so I have no choice but to agree with him. Our CC is always right :hysterical::D

[observer1]

I think that was not out. At best it was 50:50 in which case Sachin should get benefit of the doubt. As great CC is 100% sure that it was hitting the stumps so I have no choice but to agree with him. Our CC is always right :hysterical::D

and he speaks for humanity anyway, and is known for fearlessly representing the voice of science, modern philosophy, reason, rectitude and clear thinking, often all rolled into one post ('how does he manage all that' smiley) That's it, all you retards. SRT was out.

[anbuchelvan]

Daryl Harper was the one who gave it out, not Bucknor. I have this on video, BTW. This is what Gavaskar said while commenting on the replay (right after it happened); "Yes, i think this is a decision which is in the realms of possibility....and from this angle, it does look like the ball would have hit the stumps if it would have been six inches higher."

You are right.People just want to ridicule sachin just because they have to.

[zubinpepsi]

and he speaks for humanity anyway, and is known for fearlessly representing the voice of science, modern philosophy, reason, rectitude and clear thinking, often all rolled into one post ('how does he manage all that' smiley) That's it, all you retards. SRT was out.

yes i agree obs... lets accept the verdict of all-I-ONLY-know who has tried to educate us all retards in his numerous posts.. :giggle: sachin is OUT..:two_thumbs_up:

[simba28]

why has this argument gone on is a bitg mystery.. but dat didnt decision looks dubious when the first time you see it.. and i dont think the umpire shud have given it out.. But why i dont undertand is that why does CC want to impose his point.. WE all have the right to have our own opinion

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[Anakin]

:haha: