Cricket
England v Pakistan 4th Test
|
By:
3rd umpire did his job correctly given lack of clear cut evidence
onfield umpire should've given n.o. just showed replay hales has a clear look..knows it hit the ground strikes me as an honest guy yasir a good little fielder actually don't think there was any intent to cheat on his part he probably was pretty sure he caught it |
|
By:
jucel69 11 Aug 16 11:38
This soft signal is a load of bollox no it's not. you have to have something to falsify. |
|
By:
|
|
By:
|
|
By:
lol I cant say C nut
 |
|
By:
surely that must be the wrong decision...if there is no images of it carrying
|
|
By:
the holy grail is trust the fielder,but them days are long gone!
|
|
By:
Is it sky that have all the cameras there or will there be others
|
|
By:
I played 100s of games, cant remember a single fielder dispute over a catch
|
|
By:
like football refs getting the blame for not seeing everything...its the f'ing cheating players/managers making it almost impossible...
|
|
By:
when there are no pictures - sure.
but if you can delegate the decision to technology, particularly given that these close catches nearly always throw up doubt because of the camera angle, you'd be mad as a batsman to take their word and walk off. |
|
By:
To me it was clear enough for the on field umps to see it touched the ground in real time. Ignore the fielder and look at the moving blob and it bounces, through his hands and he takes it behind and higher where his hands are. The fielder knows it's bounced and i suspect there will be some interesting things said.......
|
|
By:
If in doubt, it cant be out.........But it is............WTF
|
|
By:
|
|
By:
I blame that Murdoch fella again
 |
|
By:
Haven't seen the pictures but there is a good reason for the soft signal approach, even though it's sometimes a guess: the pictures are often ambiguous because of foreshortening.
|
|
By:
Juice, i believe D S comment was in jest?
|
|
By:
Dstyle doesnt do jest!
|
|
By:
|
|
By:
i think this is one of those incidences where technology can actually make things less clear
esp when they blow it up and slow it down have seen numerous instances where the catch looks clear and then slo-mo makes it less clear or the other way round maybe in these cases should just rely on the integrity of the catcher tough one as it goes at the end of the day over time things tend to even themselves out at this point in a test unlikely to have a crucial impact but had it been right at the death in a tight match where it could decide the outcome then becomes somewhat contentious |
|
By:
You either go upstairs and let the 3rd adjudicate or let the onfield do it. An amalgamation of the two is asking for trouble.
|
|
By:
think hales wants to take up something else.
|
|
By:
Good post Jonny, have seen plenty of valid catches that technology made look it hit the ground
|
|
By:
no it wasn't pd.
i think in cases where technology might provide an inconclusive answer you have to have an onfield proposition to falsify. |
|
By:
|
|
By:
Nut, you must have the ears of a hawk!
|
|
By:
Dodgiest 4 so far !
|
|
By:
jucel69 11 Aug 16 11:46
You either go upstairs and let the 3rd adjudicate or let the onfield do it. An amalgamation of the two is asking for trouble. again, i don't see it like this. The method is sound - It's classic hypothesis testing/falsification. |
|
By:
why dont they just open with rut.
|
|
By:
Mid-ons stand a lot closer in lower level club cricket than they do at Professional level
|
|
By:
|
|
By:
Jimmy Glassback strikes again!
|
|
By:
no, the method is valid, because you only falsify the null hypothesis (the umpire's on field decision) when you have data from the 3rd ump that allows you to nullify the decision with the appropriate level of confidence.
|
|
By:
i've had 4 frigging 2nds on the bounce in the swimming!
 |
|
By:
Why is it still beyond the cricket authorities to stop people moving around behind the bowler? Nearly as bad as road cycling where the crowd can affect the result by their antics and nothing is done to control it.
|
|
By:
|
|
By:
Sorry guys,think i understand, however the use of the word falsify is confusing me slightly.
|
|
By:
You know what I would find interesting? Compare the reaction of Shah after he took that catch off Cook and compare it with the reaction of the hales catch
|
|
By:
I assume it implies, correction of incorrect decision.
|
|
By:
|