[Cricket] 2019 Cricket World Cup

[Bold Seagull]

Exactly. And in scenario 2, if it's hitting by an inch (2 out of 3 out) and the umpire said not out, it stays as not out despite the technology.

They've decided to weight it in favour of the batsman, and that's fine. But Bold was claiming that the technology can be trusted when it's missing, but not when it's hitting - that makes no sense.

It's weighted toward the umpire's decision.

 

[Triggaaar]

You come across so contrary sometimes!

Thanks.

I am not sure which system they are using in this World Cup (Hawk-Eye, Eagle Eye or Virtual Eye) but Hawkeye has been proven to be accurate to 3.6 millimeters or 1% of a stump. They have allowed a little extra to ensure umpires are still essential to the game and also to avoid massive controversy over extremely (e.g. less than 1 or 2 mm) tight margins. The umpires call aspect is about as good an application of technology in sport right now. Not sure what you're really complaining about tbh.

If you're not sure, have you read the thread? Willow was the one who brought it up - he said the umpire calls are frustrating, as it was actually LBW. Bold said this was due to margin of error, and I'm simply pointing out that they're only allowing for margin for error in favour of the batsman. If it's marginally hitting, they won't overrule the umpire - if it's marginally missing, they will overrule. It's an understandable call that they're favouring the batsman, but Bold was arguing that that wasn't the case, and that these margins only work one way.

 

[Triggaaar]

It's weighted toward the umpire's decision.

Only in the batsman's favour. Do you not see this?

 

[Bold Seagull]

Thanks.
If you're not sure, have you read the thread? Willow was the one who brought it up - he said the umpire calls are frustrating, as it was actually LBW. Bold said this was due to margin of error, and I'm simply pointing out that they're only allowing for margin for error in favour of the batsman. If it's marginally hitting, they won't overrule the umpire - if it's marginally missing, they will overrule. It's an understandable call that they're favouring the batsman, but Bold was arguing that that wasn't the case, and that these margins only work one way.

As said above, the margin of error goes with the umpire. You're just reading more into posts than is there (as per usual )

 

[wellquickwoody]

Free to air here, marvellous stuff!

 

[Bold Seagull]

Only in the batsman's favour. Do you not see this?

Benefit of the doubt has always gone with the batsmen, even before technology. That is just cricket.

 

[knocky1]

Wood not in the groove today.

 

[Triggaaar]

As said above, the margin of error goes with the umpire.

It doesn't. You're wrong, pure and simple. If the umpire gives it out, and the technology says it's missing by 1mm, the decision is overturned. That's not 'the margin of error going with the umpire'.

You're just reading more into posts than is there (as per usual )

You've got it wrong, I said so, you're arguing with me

Benefit of the doubt has always gone with the batsmen, even before technology. That is just cricket.

That's fine, and I accept that. We're only arguing because you were saying it goes with the umpire.

 

[dazzer6666]

Only in the batsman's favour. Do you not see this?

This is true in that it will never be given out if shown to be missing (which is obviously the right way to go), but may be given not out if shown to be hitting (umpire's call originally not out). The system is marginally weighted in the batsman's favour, whilst giving the onfield umpire primacy unless there is a clear error. Ultimately, I think cricket have got the replay/review arrangements just about spot on. Marginal calls stay with the umpires decision, clear errors are quickly corrected and the review process (and numbers) are well thought out and applied.

 

[Triggaaar]

This is true in that it will never be given out if shown to be missing (which is obviously the right way to go), but may be given not out if shown to be hitting (umpire's call originally not out). The system is marginally weighted in the batsman's favour, whilst giving the onfield umpire primacy unless there is a clear error.

That's all I was saying (because Willow was a bit frustrated by it).

Ultimately, I think cricket have got the replay/review arrangements just about spot on. Marginal calls stay with the umpires decision

Except when it's missing!

 

[dazzer6666]

Except when it's missing!

As it should be.................

 

[Pevenseagull]

I have a feeling of dread developing

 

[Easy 10]

I have a feeling of dread developing

Me also.

Really need to get this cocksmoker Smith out asap, before he ruins everyones day.

 

[Gazwag]

So a year today we were knocked out the semi final of the world cup, we started good that night going one up, just saying like

 

[Bold Seagull]

It doesn't. You're wrong, pure and simple. If the umpire gives it out, and the technology says it's missing by 1mm, the decision is overturned. That's not 'the margin of error going with the umpire'.

You've got it wrong, I said so, you're arguing with me

That's fine, and I accept that. We're only arguing because you were saying it goes with the umpire.

If you want a badge, that is fine, I can get one made.

I'm not wrong though, you are just daft.

 

[Titanic]

Timely wicket... needed that

117-4 (27.2, RR 4.28)

 

[Bold Seagull]

Boom!!!

Rashid breaks the partnership.

 

[Gazwag]

And another .........

 

[Titanic]

and Stoinis for a 2nd ball DUCK

118-5

Rashid's on fire

 

[Bold Seagull]

Get 1 get 2...