Counties drop referrel experiment

[Ram]

Ofcourse its fair..! People are competing for the fun of it. Wouldnt an unfair sport be no fun?

Precisely. And even in that competition , you need that element of uncertainty. Say in a cycle race, the best cyclist many times get tangled up in a bad accident , loses time. He punctures his time , loses time. So have the cyling bodies tried to stop these accidents ? or make puncture proof tyres? Ofcourse not. Even in a formula one race , many times the leader is eliminated because the driver before him screwed up, or the engine blew up in the last lap ? Do they re-start the race then ? Do you see my point ? In sport , if the best wins all the time , it will be boring to watch.

Oh boy, dont even go there. Build has nothing to do with skill. Aussie fast bowlers are big, blah blah. Does any one of them compare to Marshall? Was Marshall as big as any of them? But was he a better bowler?

I said that a fringe point. Lets not start debating the merits of build in fast bowling.

So just because nobody's life depends on it' date=' daylight robbery is allowed?[/quote'] NO. It is allowed because it makes sport more exciting to watch.

well then, why dont we just decide the LBW appeals by a coin toss? It sure isnt fair, but who cares? It'll be damn entertaining!!

There is one thing to leave room for uncertainties, but an entirely different thing to make things look silly. An umpire deciding an LBW - uncertain. Using Toss for LBW - Silly.

a, so then make the third umpire take the call in the first place.. why not? Why is it not about getting it right? If you think it makes cricket more exciting to watch, then why dont we decide the LBW outcome by a toss? It'll even out wont it? I mean probability of getting a head or a tail is exactly the same!

Refer previous points/posts for this one.

[Ram]

You seriously think cricket will become boring if we eliminate some of the umpiring screwups and get things right? If anything, a world cup finals 2003 would have been more interesting if someone like a Ponting was given lbw correctly, early.

Or Aus draw the test match in Kolkata in 2001 , because Gilchrist was wrongly given out. How does that sound to you ?

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[Ram]

Thats what YOU think! For me, cricket would get even more exciting than what it currently is!

Thats what YOU think. It wont be.

So? He made a mistake, he was clearly out, he deserves to be given out. wtf?

For Christ's sake , i am truly tired of saying the same thing again and again.

[Ram]

international cricket is quite serious business MM ... and its real and a lot depends on it ... whether we like it or not. Especially player careers .... Take RDs example ... in the last 10 months he has been mugged 4 times in 10 innings ... and a couple of times in ODIs .... which has now resulted in him being dropped. Another mugging or 2 in the Test series and the haramis would have hastened the end of a Great player .... what sort of "Charm" is in that ?

How would you feel if i pointed out many an instance , where Rahul was being so close to being dropped from the one-day team , but escaped because of an umpiring error and went on to play a good innings that sealed his spot. Its not about balancing both the sides BB. Its about making it uncertain , interesting to watch. We wouldnt be debating all this , if we had just technlology rule on all decisions ?

[Holysmoke]

Precisely. And even in that competition , you need that element of uncertainty. Say in a cycle race, the best cyclist many times get tangled up in a bad accident , loses time. He punctures his time , loses time. So have the cyling bodies tried to stop these accidents ? or make puncture proof tyres? Ofcourse not. Even in a formula one race , many times the leader is eliminated because the driver before him screwed up, or the engine blew up in the last lap ? Do they re-start the race then ? Do you see my point ? In sport , if the best wins all the time , it will be boring to watch. I said that a fringe point. Lets not start debating the merits of build in fast bowling. NO. It is allowed because it makes sport more exciting to watch. There is one thing to leave room for uncertainties, but an entirely different thing to make things look silly. An umpire deciding an LBW - uncertain. Using Toss for LBW - Silly. Refer previous points/posts for this one.

Dude, in a F1 race, drivers avoiding collisions, bikers avoiding accidents, etc is a part of the skill required to make it in the sport. Making sure an umpire doesnt faak up on u isnt a skill you can prepare for. The best should win all the time. The best team on the day should win. If the best team in the world, isnt up to scratch on the day, then it should not win. If we have fair decisions, its not that the best team will always win. I dont rememeber, but we helped by the umpires during our 20-20 win against AUS? Fine, as you say, lets not debate the marshall vs aussie bowlers comparison. :finger: Why would you leave room for uncertainties when you can help it. I really dont understand why we should not use TV replays WHEN WE FAAKIN HAVE THE OPTION!!!!!!! I guess I wont ever understand your point. For me, sport should be fair, even if its boring. For you, it should be entertaining, even if it is totally unfair. I guess its a difference of opinion. Anyways, time for me to go back to books!

[Ram]

You are yet to convince me how getting mugged so badly is exciting to watch .... lets take the 2004 B'lore test ... or the 2004 Sydney test .... or the Durban Test last year ... I really need to know .... lets get down to the specifics MM ... shall I start listing the mucks ups one by one ?

I wish i could get into this "specifics" game with you BB, but i cant for the simple fact that my memory isnt so sharp to actually remember every instance where some umpire screwed up.

except that VVS was also given out wrongly in the 1st innings and that Gillespie went on to add 130 after he was let off by Bansal... dont take my word for it ... I can back this up with evidence.

See what i say ? If it aint for Gillespie's let off , Aus wouldnt scored so much , India wouldnt have followed on, we wouldnt have seen such a sublime innings from VVS , or an outstanding Indian victory ?

[Holysmoke]

Thats what YOU think. It wont be.

It will, for me! You can only speak for yourself. Dont be under the illusion that the whole world would rather have the on-field umpire making the calls. Refer this thread. http://www.indiancricketfans.com/showthread.php?t=9711

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[Ram]

It will, for me! You can only speak for yourself. Dont be under the illusion that the whole world would rather have the on-field umpire making the calls. Refer this thread. http://www.indiancricketfans.com/showthread.php?t=9711

That is because the "whole world" doesnt understand the point, which is that 6 months into watching cricket that is charecterized by tech on the field instead of umpires , they would stop watching the sport.

[castled]

"Or Aus draw the test match in Kolkata in 2001 , because Gilchrist was wrongly given out. How does that sound to you ?" It appears that the crux of the arguement is based on this type of issues. But of course, Gilchrist could have gotten out the very next ball and the match result would still have been the same, with the same excitement. (See there, thats the beauty of cricket, however good a batsman is, it only takes one ball to get him out!) It appears that one is convinced that no game of cricket is exciting without the umpiring errors!

[Ram]

sure .. lets see them MM ... just saying it wont cut it ... lets see the matches the occasions and the specifics.... which is what I have been insisting.

I shall hopefull follow the matches that happen from now to get into a specifics argument with you later on. Not now though, i am not equipped.

Its none of the above .... its about fair play and level playing field .... a bowler does not deserve a Bat before wkt nor does a batsman .... end of story .... I just dont see how you can peddle a wrong.

For God's sake , that is where you guys arent seeing the point. This is not s criminal trial , where justice needs to be done. This is sport and you would want to make it as uncertain/interesting as you can.

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[Ram]

you wont believe it holy I was just about to link this thread myself ..... that is some coincidens ... sheeeeesh ... :omg_smile: MM , take a look at post # 41 on that thread ... thats the match Iam talking about.

As i said, i shall try to keep track of umpiring errors from now, so that i can get into a specifics argument with you. Not now though , i am not equipped.

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[Ram]

But you are all the while claiming to have been witness to such happenstances in the past .... so where are those incidents ? It would have been very easy to list such things ...

The previous one-day series against Aus , where we could have lost 6-0, if not for umpiring errors. Dont tell me odis dont count. Its cricket after all.

I have already told you that Cricket is big business and a lot of careers depend on bad decisions .... pls dont tell me that the cricketers dont mind such hackings .... get real yaar .... not for nothing has the ICC issued a gag order on players commenting about bad umpiring

And why is that you dont have even a single player ( even former) players coming out to the press , asking for technology to replace the umpires then ?

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[yoda]

Or Aus draw the test match in Kolkata in 2001 ' date=' because Gilchrist was wrongly given out. How does that sound to you ?[/quote'] If you think wrong decisions bring more excitement to the game, you have no hope. So I take it that you must be hoping for a lot of wrong decisions so that there is more excitement that game. :D

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --