• The forum upgrades are now largely complete.
    Please read this thread for more details.
    New user registrations are currently disabled.

DRS regarding lbws

  • Thread starter Thread starter stephen cartwright
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
S

stephen cartwright

Guest
i might have made this is up but was it mentioned previously that regarding lbws, they were taking umpires opinion out, when a ball flicks the wicket and in future it would be given as out, with even the merest touch

just came to mind when there was a review on a lbw against cook, umpire gave not out reviewed and the decision upheld, even though it would have hit leg stump pretty full
 

stephen cartwright said:
i might have made this is up but was it mentioned previously that regarding lbws, they were taking umpires opinion out, when a ball flicks the wicket and in future it would be given as out, with even the merest touch

just came to mind when there was a review on a lbw against cook, umpire gave not out reviewed and the decision upheld, even though it would have hit leg stump pretty full
Click to expand...

In theory, if it's hitting at all it should be out. Trouble is, I don't think even hawk-eye can be 100% certain. The review in question was clipping the outer portion of leg stump and I don't know if any machine can perfectly say for sure everytime.

For me DRS is a wonderful thing, but I think it's right the way it is. Giving the umpire a slight bit of benefit of the doubt.
 
brandon said:
In theory, if it's hitting at all it should be out. Trouble is, I don't think even hawk-eye can be 100% certain. The review in question was clipping the outer portion of leg stump and I don't know if any machine can perfectly say for sure everytime.

For me DRS is a wonderful thing, but I think it's right the way it is. Giving the umpire a slight bit of benefit of the doubt.
Click to expand...
i agree. i have a vague memory of somebody stating they were going to allow clips of the wicket for lbws
 
stephen cartwright said:
i agree. i have a vague memory of somebody stating they were going to allow clips of the wicket for lbws
Click to expand...

I could see why it would make sense, as I say - according to the laws of lbw, if it's going on to hit then it should be out - but I think everyone in the game has always appreciated that there's room for a bit of benefit of the doubt for (in the case of lbws) the batsmen (and umpires).

I think all that a change would do would be to make teams attempt even more reviews and possibly see more wickets going down over a prolonged period.
 
there was another controversy today, when the umpire gave a catch behind but hotspot showed no contact, only for real time snicko to confirm the edge

this hotspot problem really needs sorting, as you could clearly hear the edge on the mics
 
LBW's aren't an exact science and I don't think they should be used in DRS. Prefer it to be left to the umpire. If he makes a howler, so be it.
 
Why on earth are they tampering with the lbw element of drs. We all know there are issues with hot spot so fair enough deal with that, but lbw has been working perfectly well. No need to change it at all
 
Carteron said:
Why on earth are they tampering with the lbw element of drs. We all know there are issues with hot spot so fair enough deal with that, but lbw has been working perfectly well. No need to change it at all
Click to expand...
not sure its going to change. its just something i either heard or read a while back, that the icc were looking to change it and it would be discussed before the world cup in australia
 
I think Umpire's Call should be a smaller window of error than what it is now.

Hawkeye is pretty much spot on, so if it's saying half the ball is going to hit leg stump then it's fair to say that's out. I know it's only technically there to eliminate howlers, but to see something given not out when it is 100% hitting the stumps is a bit odd I think. Obviously where there's only a few millimetres in it leave it at Umpire's Call, but for example in tennis you don't see any benefit of the doubt given to the umpire's decision - if it's out it's out.
 
Dexter said:
I think Umpire's Call should be a smaller window of error than what it is now.

Hawkeye is pretty much spot on, so if it's saying half the ball is going to hit leg stump then it's fair to say that's out. I know it's only technically there to eliminate howlers, but to see something given not out when it is 100% hitting the stumps is a bit odd I think. Obviously where there's only a few millimetres in it leave it at Umpire's Call, but for example in tennis you don't see any benefit of the doubt given to the umpire's decision - if it's out it's out.
Click to expand...
While that's true in principle, in tennis, hawkeye is used to accurately show where the ball actually landed, rather than predicting it's flight after impact as it does in cricket. Therefore there has to be some margin for error, but I do think that a) the margin is too big, and b) teams shouldn't lose a review for umpire's call.

Something that absolutely must be removed from DRS is hotspot, time and time again it's proved to be inaccurate and so much time is wasted by umpires looking at every hotspot angle to see if there is any mark on the bat when snicko can give absolute proof in 1 replay.
 
HarryChest said:
Only thing I think should be changed with lbw and drs is if a theres an appeal and it is just clipping but umpire didn't give it, they shouldn't lose their review
Click to expand...
agreed hairychest. should have been like this before. there is a new drs system in though, that you get your reviews back after 80 overs. pretty sure that was the case when the saffers played aus a few week back
 
Aidan11 said:
LBW's aren't an exact science and I don't think they should be used in DRS. Prefer it to be left to the umpire. If he makes a howler, so be it.
Click to expand...
But when that was the system and they made loads of howlers it was decided it would be better if tech was used. And on the whole it is much better this way, as howlers are weeded out, and the umpire still has sway on marginal decisions. Also, when tech is used and the criteria are laid out for all to see, it is impossible to argue.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top