Australian International Summer 2024/25

[Lightning McQueen]

Pant dropped too apparently

Didn't handle the seam.

[Jim05]

Pant dropped too apparently

Standard Saturday night innit?

[dedja]

It’s not accurate … there can be a time delay between any potential edge and when snicko is configured (or more accurately, manipulated) to simulate the sound of an edge.

Some people think that once the cameras and microphones are set up it’s an automatic system … nope, there are keyboard warriors in a room manipulating it all in the background to make it look seamless.

That thick edge by Jaiswal, where the ball seemed to come off flush from the face of the edge, makes a mockery of the technology. The explanation from BBG Sports was laughable.

Just because you’re presented with a graphic that your brain perceives as a true indication of what happened, doesn’t mean that it’s accurate … same with ball tracking, it’s just a perceived trajectory of where the path of the ball may have been if not obstructed.

Once the 3rd umpire clearly determined that the ball come off the edge and brushed the glove, he probably shouldn’t have asked for snicko as it wasn’t needed to further verify. Can’t blame him, but that innocent request for further validation provided contradictory ‘evidence’ that created the confusion.

For the millionth time, be done with it and piss it off.

[am Bays]

Sounds like Bailey overruled Ronnie and the skip.
Webster to debut tomorrow, Marsh dropped

Answers to Slug when at the Darwin Cricket Club - down south pro in 2017 and 18

[am Bays]

It’s not accurate … there can be a time delay between any potential edge and when snicko is configured (or more accurately, manipulated) to simulate the sound of an edge.

Some people think that once the cameras and microphones are set up it’s an automatic system … nope, there are keyboard warriors in a room manipulating it all in the background to make it look seamless.

That thick edge by Jaiswal, where the ball seemed to come off flush from the face of the edge, makes a mockery of the technology. The explanation from BBG Sports was laughable.

Just because you’re presented with a graphic that your brain perceives as a true indication of what happened, doesn’t mean that it’s accurate … same with ball tracking, it’s just a perceived trajectory of where the path of the ball may have been if not obstructed.

Once the 3rd umpire clearly determined that the ball come off the edge and brushed the glove, he probably shouldn’t have asked for snicko as it wasn’t needed to further verify. Can’t blame him, but that innocent request for further validation provided contradictory ‘evidence’ that created the confusion.

For the millionth time, be done with it and piss it off.

I agree with what you say about error (both human and technical) associated with snicko, ultraedge and ball tracking but it has a place in supporting the decision making process but not being the decision making process of the umpires.

when you step back the DRS process was used perfectly in melbourne to justify the original decision of the umpires when it was a close call (Jaiswals LBW) and when there was a clear error it supported what the third umpire saw.

The broader cricket/sport watching community just need to be better educated on technologies limitations, so they are not seen as the be all and end all of the decision making process in all sports but rather a support tool for the ultimate decision makers the umpires to reduce the number of erroneous decisions.

[RB]

Snicko showed nothing so it’s not out for me

Do you think it was not out though?

[amber_fluid]

Snicko showed nothing so it’s not out for me

Do you think it was not out though?

It ‘appeared’ to brush bat and glove so yes it was out.
But my point was more use it or lose it.

Piss it off altogether

[dedja]

… when you step back the DRS process was used perfectly in melbourne to justify the original decision of the umpires when it was a close call (Jaiswals LBW) and when there was a clear error it supported what the third umpire saw.

The broader cricket/sport watching community just need to be better educated on technologies limitations, so they are not seen as the be all and end all of the decision making process in all sports but rather a support tool for the ultimate decision makers the umpires to reduce the number of erroneous decisions.

DRS for Jaiswal’s LBW highlighted its flaws. I saw later that Simon Taufel on Ch7 stated that the bails are not taken into account by DRS, and that allowed the ball to be categorised as not within the 50% hit zone (vertically). The supposed reason is that the bails aren’t a ‘square’ shape, so it would be too complicated to use them in ball tracking.

The fact that these mindless rules are in place to govern DRS interpretations highlights that the technology isn’t accurate enough for decision making.

That was LBW every day of the week.

Either redefine the % of the ball projected to have hit the stumps (yes, and the bails ) or completely piss it off. A 10% margin of error would be much more acceptable than the current 50%.

Use the technology for indicative prediction only, and not for actual umpiring decision making and this grumpacious old fart will be much happier.

[Jimmy_041]

Pant dropped too apparently

Eagle Rock on?

[am Bays]

Either redefine the % of the ball projected to have hit the stumps (yes, and the bails ) or completely piss it off. A 10% margin of error would be much more acceptable than the current 50%.

I a,
I ag, *breathes deeply*
I agree with you, phew that was hard*....

[dedja]

Either redefine the % of the ball projected to have hit the stumps (yes, and the bails ) or completely piss it off. A 10% margin of error would be much more acceptable than the current 50%.

I a,
I ag, *breathes deeply*
I agree with you, phew that was hard*....

Now, could you please explain this concept to my missus …

[RB]

… when you step back the DRS process was used perfectly in melbourne to justify the original decision of the umpires when it was a close call (Jaiswals LBW) and when there was a clear error it supported what the third umpire saw.

The broader cricket/sport watching community just need to be better educated on technologies limitations, so they are not seen as the be all and end all of the decision making process in all sports but rather a support tool for the ultimate decision makers the umpires to reduce the number of erroneous decisions.

DRS for Jaiswal’s LBW highlighted its flaws. I saw later that Simon Taufel on Ch7 stated that the bails are not taken into account by DRS, and that allowed the ball to be categorised as not within the 50% hit zone (vertically). The supposed reason is that the bails aren’t a ‘square’ shape, so it would be too complicated to use them in ball tracking.

The fact that these mindless rules are in place to govern DRS interpretations highlights that the technology isn’t accurate enough for decision making.

That was LBW every day of the week.

Traditionally that wouldn't have been given out. At the very least, I don't think it was a howler.

I think there has to be some margin for error as we can't be certain that the prediction the Hawkeye technology makes is accurate.

I appreciate the view that the technology shouldn't be used if we can't be sure that it's accurate. But I think that principle is already enshrined in the sense that if it's close, it goes back to the on-field umpire's decision.

If we expect DRS to eliminate the howler, then it does its job. I don't know why people expect it to do more than that.

[Lightning McQueen]

… when you step back the DRS process was used perfectly in melbourne to justify the original decision of the umpires when it was a close call (Jaiswals LBW) and when there was a clear error it supported what the third umpire saw.

The broader cricket/sport watching community just need to be better educated on technologies limitations, so they are not seen as the be all and end all of the decision making process in all sports but rather a support tool for the ultimate decision makers the umpires to reduce the number of erroneous decisions.

DRS for Jaiswal’s LBW highlighted its flaws. I saw later that Simon Taufel on Ch7 stated that the bails are not taken into account by DRS, and that allowed the ball to be categorised as not within the 50% hit zone (vertically). The supposed reason is that the bails aren’t a ‘square’ shape, so it would be too complicated to use them in ball tracking.

The fact that these mindless rules are in place to govern DRS interpretations highlights that the technology isn’t accurate enough for decision making.

That was LBW every day of the week.

Traditionally that wouldn't have been given out. At the very least, I don't think it was a howler.

I think there has to be some margin for error as we can't be certain that the prediction the Hawkeye technology makes is accurate.

I appreciate the view that the technology shouldn't be used if we can't be sure that it's accurate. But I think that principle is already enshrined in the sense that if it's close, it goes back to the on-field umpire's decision.

If we expect DRS to eliminate the howler, then it does its job. I don't know why people expect it to do more than that.

I am going to have to find a way to use this word within the next 24 hours, thank you.

[dedja]

Agree that it wasn’t a howler, and I would have been happy with the umpire’s not out decision and leave it was that (although from 750kms away it did look out).

My point is that by the way DRS is presented visually, it creates confusion, and on what it presented for that LBW, it was clearly out.

As I stated a few times previously, there are very few howlers these days, so let’s just back the umpire’s decision, knowing that they may and will get it wrong a few times.

[am Bays]

Either redefine the % of the ball projected to have hit the stumps (yes, and the bails ) or completely piss it off. A 10% margin of error would be much more acceptable than the current 50%.

I a,
I ag, *breathes deeply*
I agree with you, phew that was hard*....

Now, could you please explain this concept to my missus …

The hard* part or the agreeing bit?

[dedja]

Either redefine the % of the ball projected to have hit the stumps (yes, and the bails ) or completely piss it off. A 10% margin of error would be much more acceptable than the current 50%.

I a,
I ag, *breathes deeply*
I agree with you, phew that was hard*....

Now, could you please explain this concept to my missus …

The hard* part or the agreeing bit?

Agreeing bit … how and why you chubb up is of no concern to me or the missus.

[PatowalongaPirate]

Gambhir fronted the media just now instead of Rohit. He would not confirm if Rohit is playing the 5th Test. Rohit also absent from slips catching practice, Kohli slotted into 1st slip.

Maybe Bumrah will be installed as skipper.

[am Bays]

I reckon Abbott gets the nod and well deserved for everything he has been through

Richardson would be tempting but maybe a bit risky without a genuine fifth bowler

Abbott could also be earmarked for the Sri Lanka tour, play the 2 spinners with Cummins and Starc. Bat Carey at 6 and Abbott at 7 especially given how well Pat is batting at 8.

You won't need more than one seamer in Sri Lanka, the ball will struggle to bounce over the stumps.

Interesting that Pat may miss both Sri Lanka test due to the birth of his 2nd child.

I reckon Abbott would be his replacement in the squad and Head to captain?

[The Dark Knight]

Gambhir fronted the media just now instead of Rohit. He would not confirm if Rohit is playing the 5th Test. Rohit also absent from slips catching practice, Kohli slotted into 1st slip.

Maybe Bumrah will be installed as skipper.

Gambhir said Akash Deep won't be playing due to a back issue.
https://youtu.be/ts6-3CyGniI?si=7gCQJlPVjOj3EeTC
https://youtu.be/l3ZCfk75uV8?si=foMs4YUAz5J0FzUL

[batmanbegins]

Gambhir fronted the media just now instead of Rohit. He would not confirm if Rohit is playing the 5th Test. Rohit also absent from slips catching practice, Kohli slotted into 1st slip.

Maybe Bumrah will be installed as skipper.

Gambhir said Akash Deep won't be playing due to a back issue.
https://youtu.be/ts6-3CyGniI?si=7gCQJlPVjOj3EeTC
https://youtu.be/l3ZCfk75uV8?si=foMs4YUAz5J0FzUL

If they drop Pant instead of Kohli it is an absolute joke. Kohli has averaged above 30 once in the past 5 calendar years, he's getting an absolute ride from the BCCI and the Indian people. He's cost them more tests then he's won them for ages, there's no coincidence they become better without him in 2021 here.