England v Australia, 3rd Test, Old Trafford, 1-5 August, 2013

No reviews left for England.

looked a poor decision

Then again, snicko saying out.

Big blip on Snicko

Was about to type that Clarke just doped the Ashes but then KP wastes a review so all good.

PeterCS has just commented that the forum may not survive the inevitable meltdown when Bell saves this test match.

Didn't look out to me. But Snicko is saying it was out.

So that could be a very good decision by the on-field umpire.

Hotspot is a complete joke. Snicko it the older technology, but it's still miles better.

Australia will win this!

After getting within a few runs in T1 you could almost suggest they have been the better side in the series.

Henry wrote:Hotspot is a complete joke. Snicko it the older technology, but it's still miles better.

Aye Trev. Hotspot has become increasingly unreliable

Henry wrote:Hotspot is a complete joke. Snicko it the older technology, but it's still miles better.

Weather conditions could be playing havoc with it too? Not sure whether distance of the camera to the pitch makes any difference either.

Anyone good bowling Siddle, got that arrogant Saffie out

8 wickets to go (including the weather)

Let me get this straight. Mr K and PCS are at the ground today, together?

Henry wrote:Hotspot is a complete joke. Snicko it the older technology, but it's still miles better.

Yep, it never proves nor disproves anything. Maybe they are putting some thing on the bats.

Now Lyon needs to step up.

Seamers have taken the pressure off him, just needs a 5for now, rather than 7.

Looks like Clarke is warming up.

baggygreen wrote:

Henry wrote:Hotspot is a complete joke. Snicko it the older technology, but it's still miles better.

Weather conditions could be playing havoc with it too? Not sure whether distance of the camera to the pitch makes any difference either.

Anyone good bowling Siddle, got that arrogant Saffie out

8 wickets to go (including the weather)

No, weather does not play a part. If anything, I'd expect cold weather to make it more conspicuous. Lubrication does.

skully wrote:

Henry wrote:Hotspot is a complete joke. Snicko it the older technology, but it's still miles better.

Aye Trev. Hotspot has become increasingly unreliable

Yeah, if there's a sound that hasn't obviously come from the bat or ball hitting something else then there's no way the third umpire should overturn an out decision based on no mark on hotspot.

Why is lunch being taken at the normal time? It doesn't make sense.

tricycle wrote:

baggygreen wrote:

Henry wrote:Hotspot is a complete joke. Snicko it the older technology, but it's still miles better.

Weather conditions could be playing havoc with it too? Not sure whether distance of the camera to the pitch makes any difference either.

Anyone good bowling Siddle, got that arrogant Saffie out

8 wickets to go (including the weather)

No, weather does not play a part. If anything, I'd expect cold weather to make it more conspicuous. Lubrication does.

The funny thing is the mark on the ball it hits the ground is normally very visible.

Why have lunch at all when there are overs to make up.

Seriously what happens during lunch? Is it a sit down three course?

taipan wrote:

tricycle wrote:

baggygreen wrote:

Henry wrote:Hotspot is a complete joke. Snicko it the older technology, but it's still miles better.

Weather conditions could be playing havoc with it too? Not sure whether distance of the camera to the pitch makes any difference either.

Anyone good bowling Siddle, got that arrogant Saffie out

8 wickets to go (including the weather)

No, weather does not play a part. If anything, I'd expect cold weather to make it more conspicuous. Lubrication does.

The funny thing is the mark on the ball it hits the ground is normally very visible.

Yeah, but to be fair, hitting the ground does create a lot more heat due to friction than a fine edge.

Yes, and that proves the techno is working.

Maybe it's just me but the fine edges used to show up better.

12 months ago an Umpire wold have changed the decision based on no hotspot but they also seem to have disregarded it.

If you review it's just a lottery. If hotspot is the technology being used then it should be used as if its word is God. That is to say that no mark on hotspot should equate to no edge. Looking for an 'obvious' reason to overturn a decision is nonsense. The problem comes back to the inconsistency in the interpretation. Pietersen has now had the worst of both worlds in this Test Match; a mark on hotspot in the first innings is deemed insufficient evidence to overturn a decision, no mark on hotspot in the second innings is deemed insufficent evidence to overturn a decision.

Can somebody tell me what evidence is required to overturn a decision, because Khawaja was given out when there was clear daylight between bat and ball! What is the point of spending thousands of pounds on this technology when its evidence is treated as bollocks. Now, I think Pietersen edged it and should have been given out. But I also think he edged it first innings and should have been given not out. I'm utterly confused as to what the point of the DRS is at the moment. And I have to say I feel the same way about Tony Hill and the other on-field umpires.

It's bullshit that the Trott lbw wasn't overturned too tbh, and even moreso Aus lost a review for it. If his leg had momentarily become incorporeal just as the ball passed then leg stump would have gone cartwheeling, 'umpire's call' or no.

I do think there should be some form of DRS. But this series has starkly shown that the way it's implemented does need a serious overhaul.

Rain's come out to bat again.

Will probably hang around the crease longer than Cook did.

taipan wrote:
Yes, and that proves the techno is working.

Maybe it's just me but the fine edges used to show up better.

12 months ago an Umpire wold have changed the decision based on no hotspot but they also seem to have disregarded it.

Aye, agree with that, it was far more clear cut a year or so ago. Maybe both the players taking precautions and umpires less trusting of it.

tricycle wrote:

taipan wrote:
Yes, and that proves the techno is working.

Maybe it's just me but the fine edges used to show up better.

12 months ago an Umpire wold have changed the decision based on no hotspot but they also seem to have disregarded it.

Aye, agree with that, it was far more clear cut a year or so ago. Maybe both the players taking precautions and umpires less trusting of it.

That's my gut feel, so hotspot should be scrapped if the umpires are taking no notice of it. I agree with Gus on this one.