Donny Posted October 29, 2007 Posted October 29, 2007 mm, re. Tests being shorter if we have 100% technology deciding outs & not outs. Obviously, if you take Bossby's histrionics to be anywhere near the mark, Tests involving India will last longer because their batsmen won't be "mugged" like they are now. That he conveniently ignores the "howlers" (as do most umpire critics) where his team's batsmen are given not out and replays show they were plumb lb or DID nick the ball, indicates the weakness of his argument. And, Bossby, please leave the word 'debate' out of your replies to me. Repeating the same thing, over and over, is not debate.
Ram Posted October 29, 2007 Posted October 29, 2007 I already did ... Ponting and CA asking for Technology and getting it for the Super Test Circa 2005. There is also the case of a split vote by test captains on use of technology ... and ofcourse the retarded PCB voting against use of Technology and promptly getting screwed by Hair right afterwards. There is also the case of Ganguly filing a official complaint in 2004 Jan... RD doing the same last month after the Eng series. Ganguly/Dravid asking filing complaints is not what i am asking for. What did Ponting , CA exactly ask for ? Could you please elaborate ? And i as i keep asking , links please.
Ram Posted October 29, 2007 Posted October 29, 2007 at one point you said why dont players speak out if its soo bad ... well this is the confirmation ... and as official as it gets. You are missing my point again. There is one difference between players saying " We would like to complain against that umpire. He is bad" and them saying " We would like the umpires to replaced by technology" , which is what i am looking for. You have pointed out to the earlier one , i am asking for the latter one. You see, the players , in your case, are complaining about bad umpiring , not the system itself. Aussies got mugged in the 2005 Ashes series in Eng ... which prompted Ponting and CA to ask for technology for the super test series which was scheduled a month or so after that ashes test series. This is a well known fact. I will try to find links if you dispute it. There is reason i am asking for links. I would like to specifically know what they asked for. Did they ask for tech as an aid to help umpires, which i am all for ? Or did they ask for technology to replace umpires , which is what you are after ? Please elaborate.
Ram Posted October 29, 2007 Posted October 29, 2007 Donny, are you aware of the nature of request the Aussies made to the ICC reg usage of technology in umpiring right after ashes 2005 ?
Ram Posted October 29, 2007 Posted October 29, 2007 do u really think the ICC will let players to make such statements and get away ? Iam really surprised that you even asked about it !! Ofcourse players can comment against the system. Eg - Ponting complaining about the ball change after 35 overs in ODIs. Why dont you read what i type before you respond ? Ofcourse its only as aid to umpires .... are you kidding me ... the ICC is a bunch of old warts ... they would rather paint Lords Pink than see the umpire replaced ... Iam just desperate to get any kind of tech based decision making ..... Aaaah you see , there is the difference. The Australians want technology to assist umpires, which i fully support. You want technology to replace umpires , which no player worth his salt , past or present , wants.
Ram Posted October 29, 2007 Posted October 29, 2007 Do you really think commenting about bad umpiring is same as commenting about ball change ? Why this need to get pedantic MM ? It seems pedantic to you only because you havent understood what i had asked for. No ICC rule can go after any player if he says " We must replace umpires with technology" . dont you get that ? And let buy your take of the things that ICC may crack down on current players if they say against the system ( which it wont) , why havent any past players asked for more technology ? Neither do I think its feasible to replace the umpires .. apologies if I came across that way .... but you gotta be kidding me if you think the ICC is amenable to suggestions of arming the umpires with any technology ... they have time and again blatantly thwarted the idea ... while continuing to lie thru their teeth that umpiring is of very high standards these days. The fact that these bozos have absolutely no accountability and have complete power with no checks and balances makes it a undemocratic setup. Dont digree BB . What changes would like to happen ? Cut the chase and answer this question.
Ram Posted October 29, 2007 Posted October 29, 2007 Now could you care to tell me what happened to the complaint filed by Gangs & RD ? That is not what we are debating here. We are talking about role of technology in on-field umpiring. Lets stick to that.
Bumper Posted October 29, 2007 Posted October 29, 2007 One suggestion folks (am very serious) If you guys are up for it, we should turn this thread into an article. I suggest MM summarise his points in an article & BB summarise his pov + if possible, the rest of the points expressed in the thread., into a counter article. That will be a very productive use of views expressed in this thread
Ram Posted October 29, 2007 Posted October 29, 2007 they have ... Asif Iqbal came down hard on his own board for foolishly voting against Technology ... SMG has expressed concerns about Umpires in past ... Johnathan Agnew a died in wool old fart finally saw the light albiet very very grudgnigly and vaguely ... Nasser Hussain on live TV ... What did they say ? The devil in this case , is in the detail BB. Gotta have Hawkeye (If you are worried about cases where ball hits the bails then lets calibrate it so that it is out only if it hits predetermind area eg : the inner half of the stumps and the bails ) the snicko and TV replays and a lot of common sense in the best interests of the game and not to massage the egos of umpires .... but if people are going to be more concerned about the dent it causes to bloated Ego's of Umpires then we wil keep getting screwed. If we are to do what you want to do , why have the umpire at all ?
Ram Posted October 29, 2007 Posted October 29, 2007 One suggestion folks (am very serious) If you guys are up for it, we should turn this thread into an article. I suggest MM summarise his points in an article & BB summarise his pov + if possible, the rest of the points expressed in the thread., into a counter article. That will be a very productive use of views expressed in this thread I can do that sometime next week Bumps. I have repeated every so point so often thats its etched in my memory forever.
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