Toni Braxton is right about cricket’s video referee

Dan says:

06:42am | 11/12/09

It’s about time that all sports (are you reading this FIFA and AFL?) introduced video replay. There are ways to make sure it goes quickly, such as limiting appeals, but we shouldn’t allow human error to occur when we can prevent much of it.

Jason Ealey says:

07:44am | 11/12/09

ummmmm you might know a bit about cricket but maybe not pop culture and music diva. Whitney sang “Its Not Right But Its OK” not Toni Braxton.

Simple Symon says:

07:57am | 11/12/09

I think you’ve summed up the whole situation perfectly.  The game can only benefit from the technology and the limited number of appeals permitted ensures that there aren’t going to be countless stoppages and frivolous appeals.  They just have to ensure that they don’t allow some pedant in the chair who looks at the video 20 times, from 20 different angles before making their mind up.  All sports where possible should utilise the technology and this claptrap from FIFA about not using it because only the wealthy can afford it, then at least use it in the prestige competitions.  If that means not using it in the World Cup qualification rounds fair enough, but that shouldn’t prevent it from being used in the finals.

Gavin says:

09:22am | 11/12/09

We need to look at exactly what it is we are asking from the referral system. If we are asking for 100% infallibility 100% of the time, then unfortunately we are going to be disappointed with it. We have to look at its actual purpose which is to, where possible, draw upon sufficient evidence as it is presented to overrule a blindingly obvious decision error. We have to realise that the facilities are limited in their scope, and will not always present us with sufficient footage evidence. Basically we must have the attitude of “if it helps on a certain occasion, great. If it can’t, too bad, ump’s call”, and we lose nothing my doing this.

In relation to borderline decisions, these should and do remain the domain of the on-field umpire. The referral system is not meant to alter those 50/50 decisions, only the evidential shockers. I have read the ICC regulation on the referral process and it clearly defines what the sufficient evidence is. Without copying and pasting all 8 pages, to illustrate the point quickly I’ll run through this:

A batsman is struck on the pads; the decision is “not out – struck the pad outside the line of off stump and playing a shot” and the fielding side ask for a referral. The 3rd ump needs to be shown sufficient evidence that the ball did hit the pad in-line. In order for the evidence to be taken as sufficient, the ball-tracking technology must determine that the ball would have hit wholly within the line of leg stump. Anything short of this is not deemed to be sufficient evidence to the contrary, and is therefore borderline. Umpire’s call would stand.

A batsman is struck on the pads; the decision is “out” and the batsman asks for a referral on the basis that it would have missed leg stump. The 3rd ump needs to be shown sufficient evidence that the ball would have missed leg stump. In order for the evidence to be taken as sufficient, the ball-tracking technology must determine that the ball would have missed leg-stump completely and clearly. Otherwise it is borderline and it’s the ump’s call.

Therefore, captains need to be aware of the closeness of appeals before deciding to challenge them. Only refer if you believe that the decision was a shocker and that the evidence will support you overwhelmingly.Otherwise leave the borderlines to the penguins in the middle.

shabangabang says:

10:13am | 11/12/09

The thing that peeved me off most about the referral system was the childish reactions from Ponting. The stupid arrogant you-know-what needs to grow up and take the results on the chin.

RT says:

12:02pm | 11/12/09

I’d prefer to get rid of all umpiring and refereeing by video replay. It just delays the game and the ‘get it right’ rate is not that much better than relying on the on-field officials. It’s still just sport, even if it is big business, not life and death. If the margin for success is so narrow it depends on the lack of human error, then so be it.

shoomisax says:

08:01am | 24/05/12

Eye darkness I’m wearing now could be Surf USA. and Could not wait to try All With My Purple Life it’s an integral part of the Bloggers’ Infatuation collection through MAC Attempted murder on a Congressman plus murder of the federal ascertain. That is not terrorism? Take another tote brother. Definately! akthough that is like a post a little bit ago, it acquired something about scars i think… 
<a >wow</a>
Very cool, nice function) Sorry, a postscript. About 3, 800 died from the 911 loss. But
about 100, 000, including 5, 000 Oughout. S. soldiers, have died in
our caused War upon Terror. Unfortunately, with a few exceptions,
none of these 100, 000 were being responsbile with regard to 911. Most absolutely! At house, I enjoy the factor of very own cheff so that you can my cousin and our own friends.
Whether they’re from the mood to get pizza, pancakes, or potstickers, I’ll make it for these individuals.
And.. I love doing it! It’s as well fun to make food using your friends.
My buddy and My partner and i once made the most wonderful milkshake possibly.
It has been strawberry, honey, cinnamon flavored and yes it was delightful! 
<a >check it out</a >