Black Caps in India
-
@newsjunkie said in Black Caps in India:
@Siam That's a bit one-eyed buddy. Not having DRS works against India as well when it comes to LBWs etc. A few close shouts already in the 2nd innings. Also keep in mind, India played one series (against SL) using DRS and the players were not happy about how the 'umpire's call' worked. Tendulkar and Dhoni were strongly against it. This gave BCCI enough paper cover to justify their dollar-driven decision.
And to address the question of why BCCI is able to reject DRS - the way ICC implemented the rule was that both playing teams have to agree for use of DRS, which BCCI has not. Not defending their stance, just attempting to explain it.
So the BCCI don't allow DRS because:
like Zimbabwe and the West Indies, they can't afford it - it's too expensive to get the tech companies to install it
2 ex players didn't like it so the rest of the world has to watch different formats and conditions depending on whose playing - now that's player power!
Because teams may opt out of using DRS, (thanks to the graciousness of the BCCI dominated ICC), and yet no two teams have agreed to opt out, not even Australia and England
But why does India insist that host countries MUST NOT use DRS?
Your explanation falls very short of being convincing but let's let the President of the BCCI, Anurag Thakur, explain it, since you're so keen on unbiased (two eyed) explanations:
Thakur says BCCI open to using DRS minus Hawk-Eye
BCCI president Anurag Thakur has said that India is open to agreeing on a revised template for the DRS
BCCI president Anurag Thakur has said that India is open to agreeing on a revised template for the Decision Review System (DRS) in matches, specifically that they may agree to the use of all non-predictive elements of the system if they can be "delinked" from Hawk-Eye's projections in lbw decisions.
"I said earlier also that you can have it partially without the lbw decisions, only for the rest of the decisions, Hawk-Eye and the rest of the stuff," Thakur said. "But we need to ask ourselves if a machine is making the same error which a human is making, what are we getting out of it?"
No mention of vendors, ICC driven consensus, retired players - he must have forgotten
Seems pretty LBW specific to me and that SURELY has nothing to do with the high number of LBW dismissals in India or the vociferous pleading that accompanies any delivery that comes into contact with a leg or pad.
Things that make you go hmmmm
-
Apparently they have already lost if you go on what the clowns at the Herald are reporting.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/sport/news/article.cfm?c_id=4&objectid=11716674
-
Dude you can believe what you want. Hawkeye is the vendor I referred to earlier. Now BCCI is not going to say frankly that hey we were not able to negotiate favorable terms with Hawkeye so we don't want it. And they definitely can't get away with saying we don't support it because of the cost since they make billions of dollars in profit. If they accept it on away tours, they would have no justification to refuse it for home tours. They will hide behind platitudes about cricket, machine errors, and other PR statements. I even pointed out that now the players are supportive of DRS so the BCCI will probably end up accepting DRS in the near future.
I broke it down already in my previous posts. But if you want to believe in conspiracy theories about Lbws, then you can join those Pakistanis who believe 9/11 was a CIA conspiracy and that their cricket team only loses if their players fix matches.
-
Back to the cricket, enjoyed watching Williamson's batting. This guy is a quality player. And Ronchi is showing how even a limited player can do well against quality spin if you bat with a free mind and positive intent. The key is to not to over-do it like the Aussies tend to do - dancing down the wicket every second ball or trying to hit spinners out of the attack.
If Kiwis learn the right lessons from this test, there's still hope for some competitive cricket this series. India's batsmen are immature and undisciplined enough to give plenty of opportunities. But they need others to stand up with the bat. I think they should give Guptill a longer rope and stick with him. Not sure that will happen though.
-
@newsjunkie said in Black Caps in India:
Dude you can believe what you want. Hawkeye is the vendor I referred to earlier. Now BCCI is not going to say frankly that hey we were not able to negotiate favorable terms with Hawkeye so we don't want it. And they definitely can't get away with saying we don't support it because of the cost since they make billions of dollars in profit. If they accept it on away tours, they would have no justification to refuse it for home tours. They will hide behind platitudes about cricket, machine errors, and other PR statements. I even pointed out that now the players are supportive of DRS so the BCCI will probably end up accepting DRS in the near future.
I broke it down already in my previous posts. But if you want to believe in conspiracy theories about Lbws, then you can join those Pakistanis who believe 9/11 was a CIA conspiracy and that their cricket team only loses if their players fix matches.
So we've sat through a decade of irrational DRS allocation and legislation all because of a failed vendor/ buyer dispute?
Winger's username already taken huh champ?
-
@newsjunkie Just to clarify something. There is no need at all for BCCI to purchase equipment for DRS. They just need to do as other countries do and pay Hawkeye to set up at tests during the test.
-
@newsjunkie said in Black Caps in India:
@Siam Also keep in mind, India played one series (against SL) using DRS and the players were not happy about how the 'umpire's call' worked. Tendulkar and Dhoni were strongly against it. This gave BCCI enough paper cover to justify their dollar-driven decision.
They didn't like the fact that when the technology can not produce a conclusive answer it goes back to the umpires call? WTF?
-
@newsjunkie said in Black Caps in India:
Dude you can believe what you want. Hawkeye is the vendor I referred to earlier. Now BCCI is not going to say frankly that hey we were not able to negotiate favorable terms with Hawkeye so we don't want it. And they definitely can't get away with saying we don't support it because of the cost since they make billions of dollars in profit. If they accept it on away tours, they would have no justification to refuse it for home tours. They will hide behind platitudes about cricket, machine errors, and other PR statements. I even pointed out that now the players are supportive of DRS so the BCCI will probably end up accepting DRS in the near future.
Newsjunkie - do you know whether Hawkeye offers the same (flat rate) terms to all the international boards or, have they recognized that the BCCI is Daddy Warbucks and can afford to pay more so they're aiming to make them pay more?
-
For KW's second innings dismissal, a Hawkeye view of it would have been very interesting. The ball pitched pretty wide then spun back to hit right in front. Without knowing how far away from the stumps he is, the umpire is guessing as to whether it would hit the stumps - must have been a fair chance it was going down the legside.
Anyway, their spinners are better than our spinners - only Santner was able to apply any pressure, Craig and Sodhi were dishing up regular buffet balls and hence the scoring rate rattled along.
-
So why can't the broadcaster use the tech just for the tv audience?
It's obvious the bcci has either something to hide or just wants to throw some weight around. Either way it's a ridiculous situation for paying tv spectators
The drs usage debate in no way diminishes India's probable winning performance in this match. They've played well and deserve the win
-
@KiwiPie said in Black Caps in India:
For KW's second innings dismissal, a Hawkeye view of it would have been very interesting. The ball pitched pretty wide then spun back to hit right in front. Without knowing how far away from the stumps he is, the umpire is guessing as to whether it would hit the stumps - must have been a fair chance it was going down the legside.
Anyway, their spinners are better than our spinners - only Santner was able to apply any pressure, bolded textCraig and Sodhi were dishing up regular buffet balls and hence the scoring rate rattled along.
bolded text......and this was a surprise ?
-
@Siam said in Black Caps in India:
So why can't the broadcaster use the tech just for the tv audience?
That would really be hanging out the umpires to dry. It's pretty noticeable that - compared to the forensic examination decisions get in e.g. Australia, with endless replays and angles - we're getting only a couple of replays and the commentators are pretty rapidly going with "Excellent decision, blah blah". Their eyes are apparently a damn site faster than mine at picking up what's happened.
I would have liked to see a couple of super slow mo's of Guptill's dismissal - to see whether the ball had any prospect of clipping the ground somewhere. Similarly, at the end of the Indian first innings the strangle of Yadav - definitely came off the hip - I needed at least one more look to watch the glove to check it actually hit.... and never got it.
Could be age catching up with me - but, I want more replays!
I missed Kane's decision, but sounds similar to one shortly before that Rossco got a not out for. Commentators thought he was lucky, but I thought the ball turned so sharply that it would have quickly gone across and wide of the stumps.
-
@Chris-B. said in Black Caps in India:
@Siam said in Black Caps in India:
So why can't the broadcaster use the tech just for the tv audience?
That would really be hanging out the umpires to dry. It's pretty noticeable that - compared to the forensic examination decisions get in e.g. Australia, with endless replays and angles - we're getting only a couple of replays and the commentators are pretty rapidly going with "Excellent decision, blah blah". Their eyes are apparently a damn site faster than mine at picking up what's happened.
I would have liked to see a couple of super slow mo's of Guptill's dismissal - to see whether the ball had any prospect of clipping the ground somewhere. Similarly, at the end of the Indian first innings the strangle of Yadav - definitely came off the hip - I needed at least one more look to watch the glove to check it actually hit.... and never got it.
Could be age catching up with me - but, I want more replays!
I missed Kane's decision, but sounds similar to one shortly before that Rossco got a not out for. Commentators thought he was lucky, but I thought the ball turned so sharply that it would have quickly gone across and wide of the stumps.
Yeah Chris I was being a tad facetious.
There's currently only one mob hanging the umpires out to dry and it's simply not acceptable. No doubt the spirit of cricket is alive and well though...
-
