Why don't we stop any kind of technology? how about the run out replays ? and the stumpings?.. lets the umpire decide everything...
IF the UDRS make fewer mistakes than the umpires (which they do by a far greater margin) only a fool would turn their back on it.. But then again whats one mistake every say 4 test matches to several in a game.
Another one on BCCI payroll.
You do not have a clue, do you cricfan...
Come on guys, it's obvious that this is just a small child. He doesn't know what he is talking about
Lol and he calls himself a cricfan
My main objection to the technology is that it isn’t used correctly. Depending on who makes the appeal, a different decision can be given on exactly the same ball.
How can that be good? Or consistent?
If the ball is shown to be hitting the wickets then that must be a definite yes. Not a maybe, and therefore referring it back to the umpire original decision.
For now, its just not being used correctly
"i am against this useless technology as it is not 100% full proof"
So what is 100% foolproof? Umpires are not.
"all the 3 technologies, the ball tracking system, the snicko and the hotspot used for UDRS are not at all accurate."
'not at all accurate' mean they have no accuracy, which clearly is not the case.
"one can't judge the trajectory of a ball as it played on different surfaces not in air."
Yes you can, to a good degree of accuracy.
"stand firm on this and completely eliminate this useless technology"
Once again: it is not useless: whatever its accuracy, it is unbiased.
Why don't we stop any kind of technology? how about the run out replays ? and the stumpings?..
--
You are talking like know-nothing-at- all. why do you want to use technology which has been proven so many glitches in it?
"one can't judge the trajectory of a ball as it played on different surfaces not in air."
Yes you can, to a good degree of accuracy.
-----------
simple question - would you buy a phone which has got signal problems in some areas? no. what bcci are saying they will wait 'til all the research is done and once they have proven 99.99% accurate like in the case of run-outs. in the mean time you do all the research.
(U2074)
posted 1 day ago
You do not have a clue, do you cricfan...
==========
what clues you have, speak up now..
Dernbach'sSlowerBall (U2836)
posted 23 hours, 38 minutes ago
Come on guys, it's obvious that this is just a small child. He doesn't know what he is talking about
---
tell us what do you know, we are awaiting
Page 1 of 1
First
Previous
1
Next
Latest
Sign in if you want to comment
UDRS shouldn't be used.
Page 1 of 1
posted on 16/11/11
Why don't we stop any kind of technology? how about the run out replays ? and the stumpings?.. lets the umpire decide everything...
IF the UDRS make fewer mistakes than the umpires (which they do by a far greater margin) only a fool would turn their back on it.. But then again whats one mistake every say 4 test matches to several in a game.
posted on 16/11/11
Another one on BCCI payroll.
posted on 16/11/11
you pay peanuts
posted on 16/11/11
You do not have a clue, do you cricfan...
posted on 16/11/11
Come on guys, it's obvious that this is just a small child. He doesn't know what he is talking about
posted on 16/11/11
Lol and he calls himself a cricfan
posted on 16/11/11
My main objection to the technology is that it isn’t used correctly. Depending on who makes the appeal, a different decision can be given on exactly the same ball.
How can that be good? Or consistent?
If the ball is shown to be hitting the wickets then that must be a definite yes. Not a maybe, and therefore referring it back to the umpire original decision.
For now, its just not being used correctly
posted on 16/11/11
"i am against this useless technology as it is not 100% full proof"
So what is 100% foolproof? Umpires are not.
"all the 3 technologies, the ball tracking system, the snicko and the hotspot used for UDRS are not at all accurate."
'not at all accurate' mean they have no accuracy, which clearly is not the case.
"one can't judge the trajectory of a ball as it played on different surfaces not in air."
Yes you can, to a good degree of accuracy.
"stand firm on this and completely eliminate this useless technology"
Once again: it is not useless: whatever its accuracy, it is unbiased.
posted on 17/11/11
Why don't we stop any kind of technology? how about the run out replays ? and the stumpings?..
--
You are talking like know-nothing-at- all. why do you want to use technology which has been proven so many glitches in it?
"one can't judge the trajectory of a ball as it played on different surfaces not in air."
Yes you can, to a good degree of accuracy.
-----------
simple question - would you buy a phone which has got signal problems in some areas? no. what bcci are saying they will wait 'til all the research is done and once they have proven 99.99% accurate like in the case of run-outs. in the mean time you do all the research.
posted on 17/11/11
(U2074)
posted 1 day ago
You do not have a clue, do you cricfan...
==========
what clues you have, speak up now..
Dernbach'sSlowerBall (U2836)
posted 23 hours, 38 minutes ago
Come on guys, it's obvious that this is just a small child. He doesn't know what he is talking about
---
tell us what do you know, we are awaiting
Page 1 of 1