Australia/SA series to have referrals.

http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,24421968-2882,00.html

They're stepping up the use of technology.

Great!! I'd have loved to have it for the B-G trophy too. But wonder why ICC stepped back after using it in Lanka series!

Aus vs SA is going to be a very series and referral system will certainly add to it.

India refused it for the B-G trophy . . . it would take the "let's have a farkin massive sook and disgust the opposition into losing" card out of their deck . . . .

Chandan wrote:Great!! I'd have loved to have it for the B-G trophy too. But wonder why ICC stepped back after using it in Lanka series!

Aus vs SA is going to be a very series and referral system will certainly add to it.

Referral system, in Ind-SL series was far from ideal, with all the marginal decisions going against the batsmen.

In my opinion, hot spot technology can take care of majority of referred decisions rather conclusively (snicks, LBW - pad first, inside edge from bat, point of impact) and the pitch mat to decide if the ball landed within the stumps. Prediction of bounce in case of LBWs should be left to the on field umpire.

At least the aussies wont be able to cheat their way to a series victory again this year.

philcric wrote:

Chandan wrote:Great!! I'd have loved to have it for the B-G trophy too. But wonder why ICC stepped back after using it in Lanka series!

Aus vs SA is going to be a very series and referral system will certainly add to it.

Referral system, in Ind-SL series was far from ideal, with all the marginal decisions going against the batsmen.

In my opinion, hot spot technology can take care of majority of referred decisions rather conclusively (snicks, LBW - pad first, inside edge from bat, point of impact) and the pitch mat to decide if the ball landed within the stumps. Prediction of bounce in case of LBWs should be left to the on field umpire.

That is what I thought. But Ten Sports do not have hot spot. But Channel Nine have it. Will it be employed there? It should be interesting.

tac wrote:India refused it for the B-G trophy . . . it would take the "let's have a farkin massive sook and disgust the opposition into losing" card out of their deck . . . .

link?

That hurt my brain


oowww!

They should NOT use technology for LBWs.

PlanetPakistan wrote:They should NOT use technology for LBWs.

Ball pitching within the stumps? Pad first or bat first? Point of impact? Inside edge from bat on to pad?

Fow LBWs, I'd be happy with the on field ump only having to decide if the ball was going to hit the stumps. Whether or not it complies with the other criteria of the law can go upstairs.

philcric wrote:

PlanetPakistan wrote:They should NOT use technology for LBWs.

Ball pitching within the stumps? Pad first or bat first? Point of impact? Inside edge from bat on to pad?

For all other decisions like bat pads, run outs, caught behinds etc we can use the technology and will be able to get 95-96% decisions correct but LBWs will always be highly debatable e.g have a look at GG's dismissal in the recent test series(1:17)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D3yRNFoK6bE

some might say that its quite plumb and the batsman was rightly given out because despite being well forward he was hit quite low on the pad and there is no way the ball would have missed the stumps. How ever i personally don't think its fair to literally go by the book and to me that particular decision to give GG out was wrong and i am sure in normal speed most umpires would NOT have given him out .

PlanetPakistan wrote:

philcric wrote:

PlanetPakistan wrote:They should NOT use technology for LBWs.

Ball pitching within the stumps? Pad first or bat first? Point of impact? Inside edge from bat on to pad?

For all other decisions like bat pads, run outs, caught behinds etc we can use the technology and will be able to get 95-96% decisions correct but LBWs will always be highly debatable e.g have a look at GG's dismissal in the recent test series(1:17)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D3yRNFoK6bE

some might say that its quite plumb and the batsman was rightly given out because despite being well forward he was hit quite low on the pad and there is no way the ball would have missed the stumps. How ever i personally don't think its fair to literally go by the book and to me that particular decision to give GG out was wrong and i am sure in normal speed most umpires would NOT have given him out .

I see what you are saying PP. The third umpire should only give the info back to the on field umpire. In this particular GG dismissal, if the reason why the umpire didnt give it out in the first place was because of GG being well forward, then he should stick to that decision.

Some of the worst LBW decisions that umpires get wrong are the ones where batsmen get huge inside edges or ball pitching well outside leg stump. Those are the ones which should be reversed. Batsmen getting well forward, batsman playing or hiding his bat behind the pad, judging the bounce and whether it would hit the wkts, should all be left to on-filed umpire.

philcric wrote:

PlanetPakistan wrote:

philcric wrote:

PlanetPakistan wrote:They should NOT use technology for LBWs.

Ball pitching within the stumps? Pad first or bat first? Point of impact? Inside edge from bat on to pad?

For all other decisions like bat pads, run outs, caught behinds etc we can use the technology and will be able to get 95-96% decisions correct but LBWs will always be highly debatable e.g have a look at GG's dismissal in the recent test series(1:17)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D3yRNFoK6bE

some might say that its quite plumb and the batsman was rightly given out because despite being well forward he was hit quite low on the pad and there is no way the ball would have missed the stumps. How ever i personally don't think its fair to literally go by the book and to me that particular decision to give GG out was wrong and i am sure in normal speed most umpires would NOT have given him out .

I see what you are saying PP. The third umpire should only give the info back to the on field umpire. In this particular GG dismissal, if the reason why the umpire didnt give it out in the first place was because of GG being well forward, then he should stick to that decision.

Some of the worst LBW decisions that umpires get wrong are the ones where batsmen get huge inside edges or ball pitching well outside leg stump. Those are the ones which should be reversed. Batsmen getting well forward, batsman playing or hiding his bat behind the pad, judging the bounce and whether it would hit the wkts, should all be left to on-filed umpire.

Sorry to be a bit pedantic ...but where in the Laws does it say that "being well forward" is an exclusion to an LBW dismissal ?

The doubts in that dismissal are possibly ...pitched outside leg stump ...not hitting the stumps ....or that GG hit the ball before it hit his pad ... The referral system (as used in the India vs SL series ) will help with doubts 1 and 3 but 2 is still a guess for the 3rd umpire ...(Hawkeyes prediction was not used )

Anything that prevents a repeat of the Symonds/ Bucknor type mistake will be welcome.
Symonds was accused by the biggest non walkers in the business of failing to walk, ie the Indians.Dhoni excepted.

embee wrote:

philcric wrote:

PlanetPakistan wrote:

philcric wrote:

PlanetPakistan wrote:They should NOT use technology for LBWs.

Ball pitching within the stumps? Pad first or bat first? Point of impact? Inside edge from bat on to pad?

For all other decisions like bat pads, run outs, caught behinds etc we can use the technology and will be able to get 95-96% decisions correct but LBWs will always be highly debatable e.g have a look at GG's dismissal in the recent test series(1:17)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D3yRNFoK6bE

some might say that its quite plumb and the batsman was rightly given out because despite being well forward he was hit quite low on the pad and there is no way the ball would have missed the stumps. How ever i personally don't think its fair to literally go by the book and to me that particular decision to give GG out was wrong and i am sure in normal speed most umpires would NOT have given him out .

I see what you are saying PP. The third umpire should only give the info back to the on field umpire. In this particular GG dismissal, if the reason why the umpire didnt give it out in the first place was because of GG being well forward, then he should stick to that decision.

Some of the worst LBW decisions that umpires get wrong are the ones where batsmen get huge inside edges or ball pitching well outside leg stump. Those are the ones which should be reversed. Batsmen getting well forward, batsman playing or hiding his bat behind the pad, judging the bounce and whether it would hit the wkts, should all be left to on-filed umpire.

Sorry to be a bit pedantic ...but where in the Laws does it say that "being well forward" is an exclusion to an LBW dismissal ?

The doubts in that dismissal are possibly ...pitched outside leg stump ...not hitting the stumps ....or that GG hit the ball before it hit his pad ... The referral system (as used in the India vs SL series ) will help with doubts 1 and 3 but 2 is still a guess for the 3rd umpire ...(Hawkeyes prediction was not used )

Embee,

I meant being well forward = umpire unsure whether the ball's gonna hit the stumps, because it has so much of distance to travel.

I know what you meant ....and if an umpire gave that as a reason for not giving an LBW ...the bowler would crucify him ....

Para Batsman wrote:Anything that prevents a repeat of the Symonds/ Bucknor type mistake will be welcome.
Symonds was accused by the biggest non walkers in the business of failing to walk, ie the Indians.Dhoni excepted.

Not the Indians, one Indian. Sunil Gavaskar.

[quote="doremi"]

Para Batsman wrote:Anything that prevents a repeat of the Symonds/ Bucknor type mistake will be welcome.
Symonds was accused by the biggest non walkers cheat in the business of failing to walk, ie the Indians.Dhoni excepted.

Not the Indians, one Indian. Sunil Gavaskar.[/quote]

Fixed.

philcric wrote:

PlanetPakistan wrote:They should NOT use technology for LBWs.

Ball pitching within the stumps? Pad first or bat first? Point of impact? Inside edge from bat on to pad?

Phil,

Sometime the ball pitches half in line while half stays out? Is that being considered as ball pitching in line? Same with impact as well. IMO, unless the ball is pitches "completely" in the red zone and unless the impact is "completely" in the red zone as well, batsman should not be given out. That was not how it was in Ind-SL series. Therefore the result was not satisfactory!

a major part of the ball has to pitch or hit in line, not the whole. i think the system in sl was pretty good, but would have been much better if hot-spot was used as well. they got the other bits right imo

embee and philcric,
I am glad you brought up the point of batsman being well forward on the impact.

As i hinted before that written law should only be used as a guideline e.g if i was the umpire then there will be quite a few cases in which even if i am not sure that the ball had hit the batsman in line with the stump but i am convinced that the bowler has 'defeated' the batsman then i will simply give him out. Similarly if i see the batsman has a decent stride forward and is willing to use his bat then i might not give him out,it's this human interpretation factor which should always be the part of the game and the use of technology nullifies that.

If a batsman is caught on the crease then that means he is most likely no where near the pitch off the ball while a batsman with a decent stride forward is likely to be near the pitch off the ball hence not as badly beaten as the batsman in the first case.

So do you give batsmen out caught behind if they miss the ball by a foot because they were more badly beaten then someone who gets a feather to the ball?

G.Wood wrote:So do you give batsmen out caught behind if they miss the ball by a foot because they were more badly beaten then someone who gets a feather to the ball?

Depends ....Is the batsman a subi?

G.Wood wrote:So do you give batsmen out caught behind if they miss the ball by a foot because they were more badly beaten then someone who gets a feather to the ball?

Good point

LBW should be looked at in complete isolation and should NOT be connected with the other laws. For every thing else we can use technology.