Welcome to Live View – Take the tour to learn more
Start Tour
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
30 Dec 09 11:57
Date Joined: 07 Jun 03
| Topic/replies: 728 | Blogger: bushy's blog
Watching the Oval Test now, there were a couple of "howlers" in just one innings (from a decent umpire in Rauf) - one inside edge not detected; a bat-pad catch that was bat only.

Conversely in this series there's hardly been any major errors so far.

Is it possible that (subconsciously or otherwise) on-field umpires are concentrating better as they don't want to be made to look foolish via a reversal?
Pause Switch to Standard View Is the review system making on-field...
Show More
Report positively4thsteet December 30, 2009 12:04 PM GMT
should be less shy imo
Report RacingCert December 30, 2009 12:56 PM GMT
To me feedback is crucial to the learning process and the wonderfull thing about Hawkeye is it provides it so well and quickly.
I feel that when I am watching I am now a better judge of an LBW than I used to be so I suppose umpires must learn from it oo.
Report Innocent Bystander December 30, 2009 1:08 PM GMT
not seeing Rudi umpire an England test has a lot to do with it, imho
Report scliffor December 30, 2009 4:29 PM GMT
Best thing about playing SA is not having Rudi umpire imo (although the look on Mickey Arthur's face yesterday was getting close)
Report cricnut December 30, 2009 4:41 PM GMT
Of course its better, the right decisions are the best one and if Technology does that, then so be it. It should happen in Football, but too many people saying it will take the controversy out of the game, but in my opinion, if there wasn't any controversy at football, it would make it boring, which is what football is.
Report Deadly Earnest December 30, 2009 5:19 PM GMT
I'm not sure it is making on field umpiring better, but it is certianly minimising the howlers in the game, and that is a very good thing.

What the review system appears to have also shown is that the umpires make a lot less howlers than the players(especially batsmen, bowlers and keepers) when push comes to shove and the players have to decide whether they think a decision is correct or not.
Report Accumulator1 December 30, 2009 5:20 PM GMT
I think the review is a good idea and teams will learn how to use it. When will they bring in "hot spot"?
Report radix December 30, 2009 7:38 PM GMT
Hot Spot is a waste of time ...
Only really obvious edges show up (which can be seen on normal coverage anyway)
If no mark on the bat is seen on the Hot Spot camera it doesn't mean he didn't edge it because faint edges do not show up.
Report Al Be Fuct December 30, 2009 8:45 PM GMT
I think it must take some pressure off the umpires, however I cant see how Hawkeye can be completely accurate with the amount a variables in cricket (age of ball, wear and tear on wicket therefore inconsistant bounce).
Report Lies, DamnLies, and Statistics December 30, 2009 11:11 PM GMT
good point radix - i think the problem with faint edges on hotspot is that they may show up (or they may not, who really knows), but only last a few frames, often while the offending part of the bat is pointed away from the camera

snicko a more reliable guide for faint edges
Report TopTier December 30, 2009 11:20 PM GMT
It depends what you definite as faint edges but if the hotspot camera is in the appropiate position it will pick up all contact with the bat unless brushing the hairs of the bat.
Report TopTier December 30, 2009 11:22 PM GMT
If the hotspot camera is not in the right position then it is irrevent and not a case for an edge or not.
Report TopTier December 30, 2009 11:24 PM GMT
A fat bumble bee could be flying around the bat. Not sure snicko is conclusive. ;-)
Report aston December 31, 2009 12:02 AM GMT
Its also making the players better umpires. While I agree with using all the technology possilble im not sure I agree with the fact that the result of the match may depend on how good the players are as umpires. The umpires should make the decisions with the aid of technology and the players should play cricket and accept the decisions.
Report Lies, DamnLies, and Statistics December 31, 2009 12:15 AM GMT
very good point aston - you should stick to cricket!!
Report mafeking December 31, 2009 1:56 AM GMT
yep aston. very easy for the batsman to know when he's on the wrong end of a shocker. much more difficult for the fielding side. 3rd ump should earn his money by correcting howlers without the need for appeals rather than having a paid holiday.
Report palchneru December 31, 2009 2:39 AM GMT
The batsman would usually be the person who knows best whether or not he edged the ball, so the umpire could just go and ask him?? If he says yes, then he's out, if he says no (and the ump isn't sure) he's not out. And if he says no but did hit it he will be mocked mercilessly and rightly so.
Report Work Can Wait December 31, 2009 4:52 AM GMT
on the hot spot, they had two angles of hot spot in the recent australian test, so the important part of the bat wouldnt be hidden for that valuable frame.
Not saying its super reliable or anything, but really the review system is just for howlers, and many times in cricket I thought I heard a nick, the umpire didnt so just accept it. If its an actual edge that changes the course of the ball, but the umpire somehow missed it, thats what the review is really for.
Post Your Reply
<CTRL+Enter> to submit
Please login to post a reply.


Instance ID: 13539