That looked high but Guptill wasted the review.
ICC Cricket World Cup 2019
- Thread starter Samid
- Start date
Aus team that won the last world cup was more average than they were.
Or perhaps don’t waste reviews when you are out.
I don’t understand why they can’t just silently check every LBW with ball track. Cricket, like tennis, is one of the only sports where it doesn’t make sense to have a review system.
He shouldn't have given that out.
Great over by Wood.
NZ can be blamed for wasting their review, but another poor decision.
Erasmus is trying to be as shit as dharmasena. Pathetic umpiring by these two.
I like my suggestion better.
That Tayor wicket is potentially massive.
Umpires getting such huge decisions wrong is unfair
Cricket's one of the sports where you actually don't need on-field umpires.
LBWs, No balls, Wides, Edges can all easily be automated to give real time results.
LBWs, No balls, Wides, Edges can all easily be automated to give real time results.
NZ were stupid to waste the review but that was as bad a decision as Roy's. Also came at much worse situation for NZ. Has completely ruined the final now. Stupid of ICC not to allot 2 reviews per innings for final anyway.
Stokes can turn the screw now.
Yeah don’t see why cricket can’t implement a ‘clear and obvious’ system. Not like it’s a fast paced game.
When the tech is actually accurate.
It should be 2 reviews.
The current review system cannot account for an innings where there's many close calls or multiple instances of umpires not being sure of their judgement. Such a travesty we are not doing better.
That call could have been the WC for England.
That call could have been the WC for England.
I honestly don’t think 2 reviews would be excessive for any ODI game
It's already several time more accurate than the human eye ever will be.
Yeah, I don't get why two is considered excessive.
Go on, show me this research.
More accurate than umpires?
Agreed. 50 overs is a lot and it’s likely during those overs you’d get more than one questionable decision
Considerably more accurate than umpires. We need more than a minor increase for such a drastic change.
Bit of a farce that in a 300 ball innings the batting side can lose the review in 1 ball.
Only recently they changed the rules so that umpires call meant you at least kept your review.
Mental.
Takes ages to prepare the data for Hawkeye, if you were doing it for every shout (which you'd have to) the game would take forever.
I think the review system generally works quite well, especially now you don't lose reviews for umpires call, but I'd be open to them trialling two reviews. Both the situations in this game and in the semi have at least partially been caused by the players making as bad decisions as the umpires.
Oz team in 99 was good but in bad form. Their Openers - Waugh and Gilchrist were in bad form similar to NZ's. IIRC they were rescued multiple times by Steve and Bevan with Moody also doing welll in some games. Shane Warne pretty much won them the semis and finals though or at least have them a major opening in both games.
Can't be arsed finding any but you're having a laugh if you think the naked eye is anywhere close to hawkeye's accuracy.
1 out of 3 ain't bad.
Yea. No one is going to dig up a study to win an internet argument but the idea that umpires are as good at this as Hawkeye is
.Still think this pitch looks pretty good to bat on.
Which should be good for England.
Which should be good for England.
Turn the fecking music off
When Latham of all people is timing the ball like that you know the pitch is a belter. NZ don't stand a chance if they don't get 290+.
This now needs to be addressed. LBWs & caught behinds should be referred automatically to 3rd Umpire. First Roy and now Taylor
What if a batsman is chasing a target with Tail in a major final and given out like that... is that when they are going to wake up?
What if a batsman is chasing a target with Tail in a major final and given out like that... is that when they are going to wake up?
You reckon? It may be.
I haven't seen reason to absolutely trust that yet though and I think we're better off arguing about opinions from humans than arguing about the fecking coding until hawkeye can actually prove it is vastly superior to umpires.
They've already decided that it is superior with a buffer. That is why we have DRS.
It's just a question of logistics.
Bring Archer on
They've decided it's good enough to be a second opinion. That's very different to deciding it's good enough to be the only decision maker.