• The first stage of the forum upgrades has now been completed but they remain in a degraded state and are still being worked on. Normal posting/reading should now be possible.
    Please read this thread for more details.
    New user registrations are currently disabled.

Never should of been out

  • Thread starter Thread starter Slol
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ya reet...Doctrove to me got it spot on...Nothing on hot spot and the ball didnt look to deviate either..Il take it like but :lol:
 
Mr Redknapp said:
Has he had another shocker like? :lol:
Click to expand...

Doctrove gave him not out caught behind despite broad and kieswetter being convinced, Broad reviewed it and hotspot showed nowt, 3rd umpire errasmus gave it out on the evidence of the noise, dravid was livid.

Hotspot has just shown a noise but it takes a good 5 minutes before they can use that...
 
Definitely out. Clear noise, snicko proves it.

There's been a few cases this summer with Indian players nicking it and hot spot not showing anything. Perhaps Vaughany was right with what he was saying on 5live during the test series.
 
Andy.SAFC said:
That is what Vaughan thinks they do. Although there are no rules against it I can see no other use for it other than to con snicko and the 3rd umpire. (If of course they are putting vaseline on their bats)
Click to expand...
You can't use it on the ball so I can't see a problem banning it on the bat.
 
Andy.SAFC said:
That is what Vaughan thinks they do. Although there are no rules against it I can see no other use for it other than to con snicko and the 3rd umpire. (If of course they are putting vaseline on their bats)
Click to expand...

Players have checked bats during the game (Broad ran his finger along Laxman's) and not found anything.

After Vaughan suggested it on twitter the manufacturer's did some testing and said you'd need a layer about 1cm thick to make a difference.

Problem is just that hotspot isn't as accurate as it needs to be if it's going to be used in DRS.
 
mikemanc said:
Players have checked bats during the game (Broad ran his finger along Laxman's) and not found anything.

After Vaughan suggested it on twitter the manufacturer's did some testing and said you'd need a layer about 1cm thick to make a difference.

Problem is just that hotspot isn't as accurate as it needs to be if it's going to be used in DRS.
Click to expand...
If it reduces friction between bat and ball surely even a small amount is going to reduce the heat generated.

Hot spot shows up a point of contact if the radiation is there to be seen, obviously there will still be some too faint to be detected. The point is it is always going to be better than the human eye, just as the run out camera is, even though there are still some you can't tell 100% with that either.

Mind you, 30 years ago if you had told me you could tell if a batsman had edged the ball because of the thermal energy generated by the snick I wouldn't have believed you. :lol:
 
Last edited:
TwasOnTheFifthOfMay said:
If it reduces friction between bat and ball surely even a small amount is going to reduce the heat generated.

Mind you, 30 years ago if you had told me you could tell if a batsman had edged the ball because of the thermal energy generated by the snick I wouldn't have believed you. :lol:
Click to expand...

You'd think so but they tested it :lol:

I'd guess that even with a thin layer it still hit's the bat at quite a speed.
 
mikemanc said:
You'd think so but they tested it :lol:

I'd guess that even with a thin layer it still hit's the bat at quite a speed.
Click to expand...
The same speed, but less friction, hence less heat. Can't see why they would say 1cm would be needed rather than 5mm or even less. Do you have a reference for this testing?

Here:

You must be logged on to see external links


The 1cm idea looks a bit daft tbh, but if they really tested it properly with a smear then ok.
 
Last edited:
TwasOnTheFifthOfMay said:
The same speed, but less friction, hence less heat. Can't see why they would say 1cm would be needed rather than 5mm or even less. Do you have a reference for this testing?

Here:

You must be logged on to see external links


The 1cm idea looks a bit daft tbh, but if they really tested it properly with a smear then ok.
Click to expand...

:lol: Lucky guess on my part

I remembered it was an impossible amount to layer on
 
Reading that article it looks like a kind of jokey comment. It does really seem counter intuitive that something like that wouldn't have an effect in some, if not all cases, and you'd want to see something other than the manufacturer doing some testing in private in their own office.

Still, as you can't use the stuff on the ball, I don't see why they shouldn't change the rule to ban it from bats.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top