Opinion NMFC Board Cricket ThreadII - Windies, Big Bash, Pakistan.

[Samsquanch]

I worked for CA for a while and they have many clowns. Great to see that shocker of a thing Christina Matthew’s gone. She was terrible. Anyway, Fox is better for commentators IMO.in saying that I think Warner is being groomed for cricket on Fox and I just can’t listen to his bogan voice.

I had nothing to do with the talent. They had studios in city road but I was in Southbank. The production server was in the tearoom and they also did dev on the same machine. This was about 15 years back.

 

[SpiderBurton22]

Langer sometimes says something interesting or useful, but then he starts to drone on with some really bat-s**t boring drivel. You kind of wish somebody in the box could drop something into his coffee to speed him up a bit. Geez, imagine him and Daisy Pierce working together in commentary, They'd still be talking about the fourth ball when the ump called over.

You can see why the players hated him.

 

[Samsquanch]

That bandage on Afridi's nose is getting bigger each day.

 

[krakouers]

That bandage on Afridi's nose is getting bigger each day.

The Pakistani Pinocchio?

 

[big_e]

I worked for CA for a while and they have many clowns. Great to see that shocker of a thing Christina Matthew’s gone. She was terrible. Anyway, Fox is better for commentators IMO.in saying that I think Warner is being groomed for cricket on Fox and I just can’t listen to his bogan voice.

Under leadership of Christina Matthews, Western Australia has won all three men's titles for the last two years, they've secured more than $100 million for the new redevelopment, and she made a deal with CA to ensure we get quality timeslots for tests for the next few years.

Not sure what else she could have done to win more public support, tbh.

 

[krakouers]

Under leadership of Christina Matthews, Western Australia has won all three men's titles for the last two years, they've secured more than $100 million for the new redevelopment, and she made a deal with CA to ensure we get quality timeslots for tests for the next few years.

Not sure what else she could have done to win more public support, tbh in WA

efa

Don’t get me wrong, I don’t think she has done a terrible job at CA, just meh

She has been fantastic for WA

Need to get the WACA finished now

 

[gokangas]

DRS confuses again. FFS.

 

[krakouers]

DRS confuses again. FFS.

 

[Samsquanch]

DRS confuses again. FFS.

Explanation from Taufel advised that the ICC has modified the rules in recent times regarding the "hitting zone" based on the predictive path accuracy of the technology they use. It used to be bottom of the bail and inside edge of leg / off stump. It is now increased to include the varnish on the top of the bails and the extreme edge of the sponsorship stickers affixed to the stumps.

Hayden did make a point I agree with which was that there can be two decisions supported by the ball tracking technology for the same ball depending on the umpire's call. In my opinion, if the technology is trusted then if it shows that the ball would have hit the stumps then it's out. In England it appeared that the umpires were calling out when England was bowling and not out when they batted. They appeared to leave it to Australia to challenge and on a few occasions the DRS overturned the decision, but there were a few occasions where the challenge was not made or there were no challenges left which DRS suggested the umpire made the wrong call

 

[Samsquanch]

I've decided that Langer is actually more annoying than Hayden.

 

[Samsquanch]

Did they open the gates for spectators today?

 

[DarkPhoenix]

Did they open the gates for spectators today?

Looks like a GC vs NMFC game on the gold coast.

 

[Marstermind]

Forget about Geelong. This pitch is treacherous. Real dangerous.

No way Pakistan score 350+ batting today and/or tomorrow. I wouldn't be wanting any of the bowlers batting on this. If we lost 2 wickets now I'd declare. If they get these runs then fair play to them, they'll have really earned it.

 

[gustaaf]

Explanation from Taufel advised that the ICC has modified the rules in recent times regarding the "hitting zone" based on the predictive path accuracy of the technology they use. It used to be bottom of the bail and inside edge of leg / off stump. It is now increased to include the varnish on the top of the bails and the extreme edge of the sponsorship stickers affixed to the stumps.

Hayden did make a point I agree with which was that there can be two decisions supported by the ball tracking technology for the same ball depending on the umpire's call. In my opinion, if the technology is trusted then if it shows that the ball would have hit the stumps then it's out. In England it appeared that the umpires were calling out when England was bowling and not out when they batted. They appeared to leave it to Australia to challenge and on a few occasions the DRS overturned the decision, but there were a few occasions where the challenge was not made or there were no challenges left which DRS suggested the umpire made the wrong call

I have and never never will understand how the ICC can contrive a regulation that allows one DRS review to produce two different and completely opposite outcomes. I'd be happy if the regulation stipulated that at least half the ball must be hitting the stumps or bails for a batter to be given out to allow for a margin of error in the technology, but for that to be determined by how the umpire called it in the first instance is mind-numbingly stupid and incomprehensible.

How do you think that type of decision making would be received in tennis? If the umpire has called the ball out more than half the ball must have hit the line for the decision to be overturned when appealed by a player, but if the umpire has called the ball in, the entire ball must have missed the line for it to be overturned. That would go down a storm in the tennis world and everyone would be questioning the stupidity of such an inconsistent interpretation. In cricket that however is somehow accepted even though both sports use the same technology. How does an umpire give a batter out with certainty when the outside edge of the ball is deemed to have glanced the very outside of the stumps or bails? If that is how it actually transpires I would actually consider that to be a poor decision because the umpire couldn't possibly have been certain enough to make the call.

 

[DuckYeah]

Pakistan have played rather well in this test. Honestly thought they would be a dead rubber and had absolutely no interest leading up to this series.

 

[DuckYeah]

Forget about Geelong. This pitch is treacherous. Real dangerous.

No way Pakistan score 350+ batting today and/or tomorrow. I wouldn't be wanting any of the bowlers batting on this. If we lost 2 wickets now I'd declare. If they get these runs then fair play to them, they'll have really earned it.

450 will be enough. Or let uz score a century then declare

 

[Samsquanch]

I have and never never will understand how the ICC can contrive a regulation that allows one DRS review to produce two different and completely opposite outcomes. I'd be happy if the regulation stipulated that at least half the ball must be hitting the stumps or bails for a batter to be given out to allow for a margin of error in the technology, but for that to be determined by how the umpire called it in the first instance is mind-numbingly stupid and incomprehensible.

How do you think that type of decision making would be received in tennis? If the umpire has called the ball out more than half the ball must have hit the line for the decision to be overturned when appealed by a player, but if the umpire has called the ball in, the entire ball must have missed the line for it to be overturned. That would go down a storm in the tennis world and everyone would be questioning the stupidity of such an inconsistent interpretation. In cricket that however is somehow accepted even though both sports use the same technology. How does an umpire give a batter out with certainty when the outside edge of the ball is deemed to have glanced the very outside of the stumps or bails? If that is how it actually transpires I would actually consider that to be a poor decision because the umpire couldn't possibly have been certain enough to make the call.

I was fortunate enough to be invited to a behind the scenes view of the technology used at the Australian Open a few years ago when the CIO or COO of the company was called to some other engagement. I just happened to still be in the office when they pulled out.

My company did all of the transmission network stuff and were partners of the technology provider who did the ball tracking (as primitive as it was back then).

We were taken into the control room and were able to watch as they responded to the umpires and TV directors. As I recall, there were a few protocols that had to be followed before they played back line challenges (I am sure I had to sign an NDA but even if I didn't, I can't really recall the exact details). But I do remember that the provider was very confident in the technology and it has matured immensely since then in any case.

The other thing I do recall was that only about six of us turned up instead of the full party of 12 that were originally invited and the caterers brought full compliments of wine, champagne, desert and magnum ice-creams to the box so we pigged out like filthy gutses for the whole night.

 

[krakouers]

450 will be enough. Or let uz score a century then declare

I’d say they will let Uzzie bat until mid-late in this session, if he’s 85+ at the mid point they will let him score it, they will want to attack Pakistan in the final session with shadows and a breaking pitch

 

[DuckYeah]

I’d say they will let Uzzie bat until mid-late in this session, if he’s 85+ at the mid point they will let him score it, they will want to attack Pakistan in the final session with shadows and a breaking pitch

Whattaya know, declared. 449

 

[krakouers]

I’d say they will let Uzzie bat until mid-late in this session, if he’s 85+ at the mid point they will let him score it, they will want to attack Pakistan in the final session with shadows and a breaking pitch

Or Uzzie gets out

 

[krakouers]

Good start

 

[Nate7]

Just got home and witnessed that lbw decision.
Looks like I've missed a good day.

 

[big_e]

I have and never never will understand how the ICC can contrive a regulation that allows one DRS review to produce two different and completely opposite outcomes. I'd be happy if the regulation stipulated that at least half the ball must be hitting the stumps or bails for a batter to be given out to allow for a margin of error in the technology, but for that to be determined by how the umpire called it in the first instance is mind-numbingly stupid and incomprehensible.

How do you think that type of decision making would be received in tennis? If the umpire has called the ball out more than half the ball must have hit the line for the decision to be overturned when appealed by a player, but if the umpire has called the ball in, the entire ball must have missed the line for it to be overturned. That would go down a storm in the tennis world and everyone would be questioning the stupidity of such an inconsistent interpretation. In cricket that however is somehow accepted even though both sports use the same technology. How does an umpire give a batter out with certainty when the outside edge of the ball is deemed to have glanced the very outside of the stumps or bails? If that is how it actually transpires I would actually consider that to be a poor decision because the umpire couldn't possibly have been certain enough to make the call.

That was the rule for the first eight or so years of DRS, it was (I think) 50% of the ball had to be hitting. But people lost their shit at projections showing 40% of the ball hitting so umpire's call was introduced in 2016.

Tbh, I don't have an issue with umpire's call for the wickets zone, as that is a projection. But for where it pitches and the point of impact, that's a fact, and should be treated as purely in or out.

 

[Shermanator]

When did Chris Martin from Coldplay become a part of the cricket commentary team?..

 

[DarkPhoenix]

Pakistan have dropped their bundle