What's new

[PICTURES] Zak Crawley LBW: Was the DRS decision fair or unfair?

I

IndoorCricket

Local Club Star
Joined
Mar 11, 2016
Runs
1,723
Realtime it looked like the ball was missing leg stumps comfortably.

pM4XV2I.jpeg


Thoughts?
 
Not a worthy topic. Basically we have to compare "our own visual tracking" with DRS tracking.
 
Batsman pulled his leg immediately after ball hit the pad which compounded the visual effect that it's going leg side ..but ball remained straight after pitching..
 
Once Mohammad Hafeez talked about it, and I agree; technology flaws are affecting the beauty of this game. Should we stop depending on technology a lot?

haUgOz4.jpg
 
FearlessRoar said:
Once Mohammad Hafeez talked about it, and I agree; technology flaws are affecting the beauty of this game. Should we stop depending on technology a lot?

haUgOz4.jpg
Click to expand...
Stokes should be less arrogant and stop crying. Focus more on what can be done better in next game
 
England Captain Ben Stokes said during the post match presentation of the 2nd Test against India:

"Zak Crawley's LBW decision was the wrong one by the technology."

"Technology in the game is obviously there. Everyone has an understanding of the reasons it can never be 100% which is why we have the umpire’s call.”

"When it’s not 100% as everyone says, I don’t think it’s unfair for someone to say ‘I think the technology has got it wrong on this occasion."

"That is my personal opinion. I will say that. But in a game full of ifs, buts and maybes, I am not going to say that is the reason why we haven’t got the result we wanted. I’m just saying my personal opinion is that the technology has gone wrong on this occasion, and I think that’s fair to say.”
 
Last edited:
This is straight from highlights. Paused the delivery at the point of impact. It is clearly in line.

IMG_7950.jpeg


Because Crawley moved his leg so far down leg after impact, it creates the illusion of ball hitting outside leg and going down.
 
In the 2nd Test, it seems like tech was messed again. Also, Gill should've been out for 4, but apparently, tech saved him.
 
Last edited:
FearlessRoar said:
In the 2nd Test, it seems like tech was messed again. Also, Gill should've been out for 4, but apparently, tech saved him.
Click to expand...

Theres's nothing the dodgy indians won't resort to.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
FearlessRoar said:
In the 2nd Test, it seems like tech was messed again. Also, Gill should've been out for 4, but apparently, tech saved him.
Click to expand...

And what can they do to the BCCI for running this kind of behind the scene OPs?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
There's no point arguing about Hawkeye technology at this point. It's used in multiple sports including Tennis, Badminton, Football and Cricket. It's owned by Sony and from what I read pretty unlikely to be manipulated in real time unless you're willing to hack it and violate the license agreement.

Ball impact point and tracking to impact is a pretty established technology. The only difference in cricket is predictive tracking and accounting for movement after impact. This doesn't seem like a case where that was an issue.
 
A tight decision, but fair. 3 reds is out.

Couple of lbws just before lunch, this one and the Bairstow one (umpire’s call), swung the Test decisively in India’s favour.

England will get marginal decisions in their favour in the series as well, usually this sort of stuff evens out across games.

No complaints from me at all.
 
James said:
A tight decision, but fair. 3 reds is out.

Couple of lbws just before lunch, this one and the Bairstow one (umpire’s call), swung the Test decisively in India’s favour.

England will get marginal decisions in their favour in the series as well, usually this sort of stuff evens out across games.

No complaints from me at all.
Click to expand...
But English captain certainly has complaints.

He even evoked the "spirit of cricket(tm)".

Even when you are being reasonable, you didn't fail to mention an umpire's call as match turning.
 
JattMaula said:
Even when you are being reasonable, you didn't fail to mention an umpire's call as match turning
Click to expand...

Well, an umpiring decision can be match turning. Not necessarily this one, but it can happen. Are you saying it can’t?
 
followed said:
That shubman gill dismissal was more controversial. He seemed out and he even asked his partner for review he knew he did not hit it he took the review for the sake of it.

Drs reviews might be tampered with in India.
Click to expand...

Ball tracking system is handled by Hawkeye (from UK) in each and every international game. It's not some dressing room shower that BCCI would "tamper" with just for the sake of it..

Atleast gather some info before moaning out conspiracies everytime..
 
followed said:
That shubman gill dismissal was more controversial. He seemed out and he even asked his partner for review he knew he did not hit it he took the review for the sake of it.

Drs reviews might be tampered with in India.
Click to expand...
An fyi. Quite a few marginal DRS calls went against Ind in the odi WC and also the SA test series.. that's just sport. Again DRS is to eliminate the howlers and not for extremely marginal calls because the Hawkeye system has some predicted path trajectory. So a big piece of advice to the batsmen- you have a bat and so use it..dont hide it behind the pad and you will then be fine in every situation 🙂
 
Ball was clearly missing the stumps because at the time of impact we can see almost all three stumps.

This DRS will always remain controversial in cricket.
 
Mesozoic said:
Ball tracking system is handled by Hawkeye (from UK) in each and every international game. It's not some dressing room shower that BCCI would "tamper" with just for the sake of it..

Atleast gather some info before moaning out conspiracies everytime..
Click to expand...
Lol like they can't be bought with money(Hawkeye people). Everything can be bought with money.

Most of these DRS issues happen in games involving India.

You don't need to be a rocket scientist to comprehend all the shady things in Indian matches
 
followed said:
Lol like they can't be bought with money(Hawkeye people). Everything can be bought with money.

Most of these DRS issues happen in games involving India.

You don't need to be a rocket scientist to comprehend all the shady things in Indian matches
Click to expand...

I am saying BCCI did it. So what? Game is over. India won. Next match BCCI will do the same. No stopping them.
 
It was one of the worst DRS decisions for me. Clearly looked like missing the stumps and should have been a not-out. ICC sleeping as usual.
 
BouncerGuy said:
I guess you are trying to prove me wrong but that ball was not hitting the stumps completely. it must have an umpires call at least if not missing the whole stump.
Click to expand...

If even 50 per cent of the ball was hitting the stumps. Its out.

Read about parallax effect. You will know why you are wrong.
 
It didn’t look out to the naked eye, but sometimes they don’t. I can completely understand why the umpire gave it not out due to the stumps being exposed. But “only out if you can’t see the stumps” may be an outdated view of lbw. The technology is there to correct a mistake, and to some extent it can bring bowlers more into the game particularly with lbws (as well as saving a batsman’s hide on other occasions) — technology has been very good for cricket, and here, the right decision was made.
 
FearlessRoar said:
Once Mohammad Hafeez talked about it, and I agree; technology flaws are affecting the beauty of this game. Should we stop depending on technology a lot?

haUgOz4.jpg
Click to expand...

I think DRS has dramatically improved the game for spin bowling and encouraged attacking lines that target the stumps + forced batsmen to play and even innovate to counter. I remember the old rubbish thrust a pad out, get hit plumb and claim the not-even-in-the-laws "benefit of the doubt".

More decisions are correct these days. Sometimes we still disagree with an umpires call so that's an even wash -same as before- but refer to previous sentence. The picture we are looking at seems to be smashing leg stump with both feet deep inside the crease and not much further to travel to me and if any other captain had come out with this hogwash we'd have, "india think they run the game" or "whingeing Aussies" , "Pakistan conspiracies" etc etc.
 
Nikhil_cric said:
The first camera is in line of or even beyond off stump.

Hawkeye from right behind middle stump.

Thats your difference
Click to expand...
First camera is also in line with the middle stump. Check complete picture and both white lines for wide ball at the crease are symmetrical. (Same angles). Which can only happen when you have camera at the middle stump line

There is clearly a technological error here. No two ways about it
 
SaimFan said:
First camera is also in line with the middle stump. Check complete picture and both white lines for wide ball at the crease are symmetrical. (Same angles). Which can only happen when you have camera at the middle stump line

There is clearly a technological error here. No two ways about it
Click to expand...

There are definitely two ways about it. Check the Simon Hughes tweet I posted. Nothing wrong with HawkEye here.
 
wrongun said:
I think DRS has dramatically improved the game for spin bowling and encouraged attacking lines that target the stumps + forced batsmen to play and even innovate to counter. I remember the old rubbish thrust a pad out, get hit plumb and claim the not-even-in-the-laws "benefit of the doubt".

More decisions are correct these days. Sometimes we still disagree with an umpires call so that's an even wash -same as before- but refer to previous sentence. The picture we are looking at seems to be smashing leg stump with both feet deep inside the crease and not much further to travel to me and if any other captain had come out with this hogwash we'd have, "india think they run the game" or "whingeing Aussies" , "Pakistan conspiracies" etc etc.
Click to expand...
Yea it was correct decision not sure why fans or player are complaining.
Kuldeep releases from close to the stumps, ball pitched on leg, hit Crawley in front of leg stump and he was right back on his stumps. OUT
 
From naked eye, it looked not out though. I was shocked to see the decision got revised in DRS
 
Rajdeep said:
From naked eye, it looked not out though. I was shocked to see the decision got revised in DRS
Click to expand...

Agree. I was surprised to see the 3 reds. But I agree with the conclusion of the technology.
 
The English media usually whine when close calls go against their team. But I haven't seen the players whine, except Ben Stokes.
Their fans and the anti-India fans in this forum do come up with conspiracies. We all remember when the BCCI opposed the DRS system, the same fans cried foul. This behaviour is not unusual and it provides some entertainment. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

The Bald Eagle
  • Poll Poll
[VIDEO] Has Zak Crawley's antics turned the Lord's Test into a war zone for team India?
Replies
65
Views
2K
Cricket Warrior
Cricket Warrior
Runner Up
Time to bring AI into Cricket: Can It replace DRS and ensure error-free umpiring?
Replies
10
Views
604
DeadlyVenom
D
BouncerGuy
[PICTURE/VIDEO] Akash Deep’s dismissal of Joe Root on Day 4 of the second Test – Fair delivery or illegal?
Replies
15
Views
2K
big_gamer007
big_gamer007
BouncerGuy
  • Poll Poll
[PICTURE] “If a batter decides to leave the ball and it's still hitting the stumps, I think that should be out": Chris Woakes
Replies
12
Views
656
BunnyRabbit
B
Cricket Warrior
[PICTURES] ICC T20 World Cup: Controversial LBW decision in Mahmudullah's dismissal against South Africa
Replies
17
Views
938
BouncerGuy
BouncerGuy
Back
Top