• TV
  • MOVIES
  • MUSIC
  • SHOWBIZ
  • SOAPS
  • GAMING
  • TECH
  • FORUMS
  • Follow
    • Follow
    • facebook
    • twitter
    • google+
    • instagram
    • youtube
Hearst Corporation
  • TV
  • MOVIES
  • MUSIC
  • SHOWBIZ
  • SOAPS
  • GAMING
  • TECH
  • FORUMS
Forums
  • Register
  • Login
  • Forums
  • Entertainment
  • Sport
International Cricket 2016
<<
<
138 of 284
>>
>
Bhaveshgor
09-06-2016
Originally Posted by mimik1uk:
“i dont mind the umpires call tbh , there is a margin of error with the technology so giving the benefit of the doubt to the onfield umpires original decision on marginal calls is the best way to counter that imo

whether the thresholds for where the umpire's call element kicks in is correct is another matter. that bairstow lbw earlier would have had leg stump knocked out of the ground but he is saved on the basis of 0.02% of the ball's width”

hard to see the umpire call changing either, since not actually sure it got the result ICC were looking for either in the test they did, was going to post this earlier but wasn't sure it was correct so didn't want to post it but anyway the error of the hawkeye is 1 and half inches which is the size of a golf ball which is very good at determine the height compared to the stumps but very average compared to the width of the stumps, essentially it is only 100 percent guaranteed to be out if it the middle stumps, get tricky when it hits the first or 3rd stump, since the accuracy of the results drop from 75%-50%, suspect the umpire call is big or close to 50 percent of hitting stumps to account for the golf ball size error.

Not sure if the results are correct and the telegraph article was worded weird since it only mentioned the height, hard to see 1 and half inches being correct for width since I suspect with that error for width no one would accept Hawkeye for the DRS.

For the hawkeye to have credibility it probably needs to have an error of 0.75-1 inch error for the width.
if it hits the middle of the third or first stump it need to be close to 80-90% accurate of being out rather than 50-75% it would be if the error was 1.5 inch.

Just so people can see how big 1.5 inch error his, the size of the Stump is 1.5 inch.
Bhaveshgor
09-06-2016
Originally Posted by makeba72:
“I seem to recall that they increased the threshold a while back, in favour of the umpire over the tech, which seemed the wrong thing to do IMO.”

Originally Posted by mimik1uk:
“yeah they changed the point the % was measured from the edge of the stump to the middle of the stump iirc”

TBH this kind of suggest 1.5 inch error is correct, since the umpire call would have to be bigger and actually close to 50 percent of the stump if the figure is correct.

Really good innings from Bairstow, he is in the form of his life actually quite hard seeing him getting out now.
Ballance probably needs to learn from him that you can change your technique and be even better, it is tough work but it can be done.
SULLA
09-06-2016
Originally Posted by bradybrady:
“Well played Johnny Bairstow

Must be close to a 1000 runs this year already”

Well done Jonny
Miss Ann Thropy
09-06-2016
Third test, I'd forgotten all about it, had a lamb vindaloo + bottle of Peroni, just in time for the highlights on C5.
Darren Lethem
09-06-2016
Just watching C5 highlights for 1st time. Do they commentate live or add afterwards ?
Bhaveshgor
09-06-2016
Originally Posted by Darren Lethem:
“Just watching C5 highlights for 1st time. Do they commentate live or add afterwards ?”

Live but add things afterwards, if the comms not good enough.
They essentially barely speak unless something major happens.
makeba72
09-06-2016
Originally Posted by Darren Lethem:
“Just watching C5 highlights for 1st time. Do they commentate live or add afterwards ?”

It's a question I've asked myself, too, so I hope someone knows. It feels like they commentate live from the way they react. And I think Aggers has made some remark about Boycott doing his stint in their comm box, too, which made it sound like it was live.
Bhaveshgor
09-06-2016
Originally Posted by makeba72:
“It's a question I've asked myself, too, so I hope someone knows. It feels like they commentate live from the way they react. And I think Aggers has made some remark about Boycott doing his stint in their comm box, too, which made it sound like it was live.”

There an article on it will find it after work. Shows how they do it, based on the ashes test in Durham when the game finished around 7.20 or something and the show started as the game was still going on, they had a live interview with broad I think or very close to it being live.
Miss Ann Thropy
09-06-2016
On a 350-3 pitch first day, draw your own conclusions. I thought Sri Lanka bowled smartly given the favourable conditions for batting. Some of the batters getting out in the usual ways due to their weaknesses. Bairstow could yet steer England past 350 but that's small fry to what they should be getting.
mb@2day
10-06-2016
Originally Posted by Miss Ann Thropy:
“On a 350-3 pitch first day, draw your own conclusions. I thought Sri Lanka bowled smartly given the favourable conditions for batting. Some of the batters getting out in the usual ways due to their weaknesses. Bairstow could yet steer England past 350 but that's small fry to what they should be getting.”


I was thinking a 400 first innings was in sight after the first hour but once again the england middle order didnt do the business and bat anywhere near good enough. Theres been plenty of disruption for us with injuries and loss of form but given the weak Sri Lankan bowling we ought to take that to task on a first day flat wicket at Lords or else be dissatisfied.
mimik1uk
10-06-2016
just caught a bit of the interview with nasser they did about his early career when waiting for the live coverage to start and he spoke about the time mike gatting got his nose smashed against the west indies and they showed the classic clip of the press conference when one of the reporters asked "where exactly on the nose did it hit you" and he is sitting there looking like this

http://p.imgci.com/db/PICTURES/CMS/125700/125763.jpg
swingaleg
10-06-2016
Just think how good England would be if we had a top 5 that could regularly get beyond 100-4

We'd be scoring 600 or 700 most of the time......
Bhaveshgor
10-06-2016
http://svgeurope.org/blog/headlines/...-evening-show/
Here the channel 5 highlights article.
Bhaveshgor
10-06-2016
On the DRS, Telegraph removed the claim of the 1.5 inches stuff, was probably a mistake, would like to know the real error though especially if they are to reduce the umpire call.
Lojen
10-06-2016
Originally Posted by mimik1uk:
“just caught a bit of the interview with nasser they did about his early career.....”

Nasser was a year above me at the secondary school I attended for a while, and he was talked of even then as a cert for England in the future. The funny thing was that when I saw him play for the school cricket 11 he always used to bowl and I often later wondered why he never bowled in his professional career. I finally got the answer in that interview.
mimik1uk
10-06-2016
Originally Posted by Bhaveshgor:
“On the DRS, Telegraph removed the claim of the 1.5 inches stuff, was probably a mistake, would like to know the real error though especially if they are to reduce the umpire call.”

i'm always wary about how reliable a set margin for error is with hawkeye as the aspect that it just cant predict is late swing

how many times do we see a ball almost go sideways after it passes the bat, just no way hawkeye could ever predict that sort of movement
gomezz
10-06-2016
TMS preview today said that someone had been testing the accuracy of DRS and concluded that 1.5 inches was the figure. No confidence limits quoted though so assume the standard 95%.
mimik1uk
10-06-2016
Originally Posted by Lojen:
“Nasser was a year above me at the secondary school I attended for a while, and he was talked of even then as a cert for England in the future. The funny thing was that when I saw him play for the school cricket 11 he always used to bowl and I often later wondered why he never bowled in his professional career. I finally got the answer in that interview.”

yeah it showed just how determined he was that after struggling with his bowling he was able to put in the amount of work he did to be able to make it as a batman

the best line from him in that interview was about not being overly reliant on coaching, and that you learn yourself from practice and honing your own technique to something that works through hours of just batting itself
Miss Ann Thropy
10-06-2016
Originally Posted by Miss Ann Thropy:
“On a 350-3 pitch first day, draw your own conclusions. I thought Sri Lanka bowled smartly given the favourable conditions for batting. Some of the batters getting out in the usual ways due to their weaknesses. Bairstow could yet steer England past 350 but that's small fry to what they should be getting.”

Things going well on day 2 as listening at lunchtime (5 Live X), Bairstow and Woakes are still there.
mimik1uk
10-06-2016
woakes has certainly taken his chance after only being picked because of the injury to stokes

still not 100% convinced about his bowling but cant really argue with what he has done in this series

could be some batting line-up when stokes comes back with ali at #8 and woakes at #9
Bhaveshgor
10-06-2016
Originally Posted by mimik1uk:
“i'm always wary about how reliable a set margin for error is with hawkeye as the aspect that it just cant predict is late swing

how many times do we see a ball almost go sideways after it passes the bat, just no way hawkeye could ever predict that sort of movement”

True just wanted to know the figure to see if it is actually viable to reduce the umpire call.
I do like the DRS but the only complaint I have about the DRS system is that ICC keeps on rushing technology before actually testing it and then testing it on a cricketing terms before being used.

Hawkeye and Hotspot was both rushed before ICC even knew about the accuracy and reliability of it.
in the hawkeye they actually found it to be less accurate and reliable so had to give umpires more leeway than originally planned.

would have preferred if they did the route the other sports did and actually do 2-3 yrs of fully testing before bringing in the technology, don't really like them improving or testing the technology while it is being used.
This MIT testing stuff should have been done 4-5 yrs ago not sure why their doing it now.

The error margin is quite important really since a big or medium error make it very difficult for the hawkeye to predict accurately if it is out or not if it hit the first or third stump.
Take bairstow DRS yesterday it hit 49.1 percent of the stump, but if the margin of error was 1.5 inches basically it could be 100 percent hitting the stump or 0.9 percent of hitting the stump.
Also no idea about the law book or the umpiring book but essentially when it hits the leg the ball is assumed to be going straight from the line it hit the leg, the ball can't swing or drift for the spinner.
Quote:
“The umpire must assume that the ball would have continued on the same trajectory after striking the batsman,”

DRS got this assumption built in.

it is all well saying reduce the umpire call to 25% but for that to actually happen the error margin has to be 50% smaller than the current error margin.
if the error margin hasn't really changed and the 25% umpire call happens then really the part that affect 26-49% is guesswork and is literally no different to umpires making a decision the only difference being a computer make the decision rather than a human being and their is no confidence if the result is right or wrong.

The number of the error doesn't really matter just the percentage compared to the width of the stump.
1.5 inch error has a percentage error of 16.6%
and for the height the percentage error is 5.3%
ICC should really have a figure they would like the percentage error to be but not sure they actually know what they want from the DRS, some want it to make most decision and some want it to just decide howlers.
if they just want it for the howlers then Hawkeye not really great considering it can only be used if hits middle of the stump or some part of the ball hitting the middle stump.
if they want to use it to make most decision that is fine but they really shouldn't be saying for certainty the umpire call decision are the correct ones.

think the percentage error has to be around 5-9% for the Hawkeye to work really well.
They should really have a maths guy or a physics guy on the ICC Cricket committee, considering don't really like the idea of them changing the Umpires call rules just because cricketers don't like the umpire call, if the umpire call gonna change the error margin got to be better if not then their either stick with the umpire call or they basically stop using Hawkeye.
Bhaveshgor
10-06-2016
Originally Posted by mimik1uk:
“woakes has certainly taken his chance after only being picked because of the injury to stokes

still not 100% convinced about his bowling but cant really argue with what he has done in this series

could be some batting line-up when stokes comes back with ali at #8 and woakes at #9”

Think Stokes would replace Woakes from the team, although it depends on Finn current form.
Miss Ann Thropy
10-06-2016
Originally Posted by mimik1uk:
“could be some batting line-up when stokes comes back with ali at #8 and woakes at #9”

Got me thinking how we could have a side that batted right through to jack.

Off the top of my head...

Cook
Hales
Compton
Root
Vince (place up for grabs though)
Bairstow
Ali
Stokes
Woakes
Broad
Anderson

Looks good doesn't it, maybe Jimmy could get some more batting practice in, it's not as though he can't hold the willow.
alanwarwic
10-06-2016
Originally Posted by mimik1uk:
“i'm always wary about how reliable a set margin for error is with hawkeye as the aspect that it just cant predict is late swing

how many times do we see a ball almost go sideways after it passes the bat, just no way hawkeye could ever predict that sort of movement”

But it does not matter if it did not happen. It is now embarassing all round the way they have designed/changed it.

Let hawkeye decide and call them 'lifelines'. Calling hawkeye is that 'knowledgable friend'.
mimik1uk
10-06-2016
Originally Posted by Miss Ann Thropy:
“Got me thinking how we could have a side that batted right through to jack.

Off the top of my head...

Cook
Hales
Compton
Root
Vince (place up for grabs though)
Bairstow
Ali
Stokes
Woakes
Broad
Anderson

Looks good doesn't it, maybe Jimmy could get some more batting practice in, it's not as though he can't hold the willow.”

my only worry about that line-up, and i agree it does look good, is are woakes and stokes good enough with the ball to back up broad and anderson

compton's place is also far more at risk than vince i would think

borthwick's name has been mentioned alot as a possible replacement to compton, add his ability to bowl the odd over of filthy legspin as a bit of extra variety as well maybe.
<<
<
138 of 284
>>
>
VIEW DESKTOP SITE TOP

JOIN US HERE

  • Facebook
  • Twitter

Hearst Corporation

Hearst Corporation

DIGITAL SPY, PART OF THE HEARST UK ENTERTAINMENT NETWORK

© 2015 Hearst Magazines UK is the trading name of the National Magazine Company Ltd, 72 Broadwick Street, London, W1F 9EP. Registered in England 112955. All rights reserved.

  • Terms & Conditions
  • Privacy Policy
  • Cookie Policy
  • Complaints
  • Site Map