3RD TEST: Australia v West Indies WACA Dec 16 - Dec 20 2009

[Gaba]

I know and that is the problem. If we are using technology we may as well use everything.

Yes i agree with you about using technology

But looking at the technology over the last 2 test matches it brings more doubt

like hawkeye there is noway it can be 95% right , it doesnt take conditions of the pitch, for example how much the ball spins, and i have doubts how it thinks the ball will miss the stumps or not

i dont think hawkeye should be used for the height of lbws

 

[Hallatia]

I know and that is the problem. If we are using technology we may as well use everything.

snicko is inconclusive, I think that is why they don't use it, I think once they can differentiate between the readings snicko provides they will be able to use it in the UDRS

 

[aussies1st]

Yes i agree with you about using technology

But looking at the technology over the last 2 test matches it brings more doubt

like hawkeye there is noway it can be 95% right , it doesnt take conditions of the pitch, for example how much the ball spins, and i have doubts how it thinks the ball will miss the stumps or not

i dont think hawkeye should be used for the height of lbws

By the time the ball impacts the player hawkeye has enough data to know the bounce and amount of spin. The only way it wouldn't is if it hit the batter on the full.

 

[aussies1st]

snicko is inconclusive, I think that is why they don't use it, I think once they can differentiate between the readings snicko provides they will be able to use it in the UDRS

Looks pretty straight forward to me. Plus if they did proper testing they would find out all the noises that occur around the time of impact.

 

[yappy]

And the thing about Hawkeye is that the centre of the ball has to hit for it to be given as conclusive. There were a few LB's in the first test that were showing the ball hitting, but because the centre of the ball was just missing the decisions weren't overturned.

Fair enough to. You can't get it 100% right even with all the technology in the world. Anyone who's ever played the game has been on the wrong end of a dusty decision, you cop it on the chin and get on with it.

The technology will help with the absolute howlers, but close ones will always have a bit of doubt attached. They'll fine tune the referral system over time.

 

[Big Pete]

Look at all the members with the victim mentality "Awww Australia always gets the rub of the green, they would've lost had it gone the other way!". Grow up, Australia have had to deal with their fair share of bogus decisions in the past 12 months and it just so happens one has ended a test match a bit earlier than what was initially believed. Odds are, Australia were going to win anyway, it wasn't as if the West Indies were in the drivers seat so ultimately, the better team did end up winning.

Good on the West Indies though. They've surprised a lot of pundits and I believe they'll take more out of this series than the Australians.