BSD has stopped watching sport?
One is telling you where the ball did landā¦the other is telling you where it thinks the ball will go.
I donāt mind the technology per se, but I do think too many official-type people think itās holy writ.
Does that mean heās going to stop telling us about how to sync up the FTA picture with the radio commentary?
Because thatās enthralling every single time.
1 Like
Haha. Can I embarrassingly admit though that I still donāt know how to do that?
1 Like
Not sure tbh. I have always assumed it is very accurate.
I think this sort of technology is built mostly on trust anyway.
Whether it is accurate or not is obviously important, but if people (players and fans) donāt trust the technology then itās ultimately pointless.
I think itās perfectly fine not knowing how to do something that seems a complete waste of time.
I strongly suspect that the match referee will refer these misgivings to the ICC. Whether they give a toss or not, I donāt know.
It all depends on the funding for it, and who gets the kickbacks.
It used to be fairly obvious that Channel 9 had a share in the funding by the way most commentators were extremely reluctant to comment on the dodgy calls. Of course, Warne and Healy couldnāt toe the party line and they regularly queried the calls.
The technicians should be censured for providing a map of Paineās dismissal showing that the point of impact clearly wasnāt right.
Maybe they could query the Taylor overturn by comparing it with Paineās.
With the Santner one, Dar should be reprimanded.
Itās not just the players and fans who doubt ball tracker. Thereās a video of one where Nigel Long gives someone out LB to a full toss that was clearly reverse swinging late (from Wagner) into the stumps. Drs had it continuing on past off stump. You can hear Long consoling Wagner, saying he has no idea how the technology thinks thatās missing. The Umps donāt think itās accurate either.
Technology was brought in to eliminate mistakes and discussions around those mistakes. Even with technology mistakes seemingly are made, leading to even more discussion.
It hasnāt helped, in England VAR is hopeless (brought in only for clear and obvious errors, yet now defenders are afraid to blink incorrectly or a foul will be given against them), in AFL itās terrible and still they get it wrong and āThe bunkerā in the NRL is always being criticised.
Itās not eliminating any and all doubt, but just creating more controversy. Scrap itā¦sport was just fine before it all came in, and the need to remove any and all mistakes from the games has made it soulless and taken away from the sports involved.
2 Likes
I think itās about the way you use it. I was listening to a podcast where this guy was saying that in the NBA they have enough data on each ref to manage individual bias out of the game and that the āsky is the limitā potential from what theyāve been developing would be applying it police officer and security screening and training.
AFL goal line tech would be fine if they invested sufficiently in the tech. The cameras are too low quality (in detail and frame rate) to determine things. Get it right and thereās no big issue.
1 Like
DRS for LBW is flawed, it is good though when the player actually hits the ball strongly and clearly. Edge/heat technology doesnāt work a lot of times due to tape on the bats and the size of them and snicko can be hit and miss (no pun intended) because not just the ball hitting the bat makes a sound, sometimes the player hits the pad or ground at the same time as maybe getting an edge. I have seen them give it out despite clear gap between bat and ball simply because snicko had a spike. If common sense isnāt going to be applied then donāt use the technology or get better 3rd umpires (maybe donāt use umpires at all for a booth review?).
1 Like
Iāve gone on about this many times before, but yeah I strongly agree with the premise of the post.
My reasoning is that unless the technology is available at all levels and not just televised pro matches then it shouldnāt be used.
And yeah, everyone keeps striving for 100% accuracy even though it will never be achieved.
1 Like
Half the issue is the application. Having two reviews is BS and the umpires should be the ones reviewing it. Should categorically avoid situations like in the ashes where a bloke is plumb LBW and given not out, no reviews left, and the decision ultimately changed the result of the match.