3rd Ashes test Old Trafford

First topic message reminder :

SQUAD

Squad Alastair Cook (capt), Joe Root, Jonathan Trott, Kevin Pietersen, Ian Bell, Jonny Bairstow, James Taylor, Matt Prior, Tim Bresnan, Stuart Broad, Graeme Swann, James Anderson, Chris Tremlett, Monty Panesar

Mike Selig wrote:92-2 at lunch then. In fairness England have bowled a lot better since the first wicket fell, but that moment of injustice has made what would have been Australia's session fairly even.

What's the solution re DRS then folks? It is meant to eradicate the howlers, but so far in this series it has failed at that 3 times (Broad not out first test, Rogers out last game, Khawaja now), and produced a howler from a perfectly good original call (Trott first test). You can argue human error all you like (whether from the umpires or the players taking the wrong reviews) but the point of DRS was to eradicate the drastic human errors was it not? At the moment at that it is failing, so what's the solution?

More training and better training for the umpires with clearer directives is an obvious start.

I think they have to change the mindset of the 3rd Umpire. They should be trained to make their decision with NO thought of the on-field call. So the 3rd Umpire for the Khawaja review, should simply be making his decision based on did he think it was out or not. Not is there enough evidence to overturn?

Mike Selig wrote:I have to say live it looked out, but the first replay from front on for me is enough: clear daylight and the "click" which you heard live is not as the ball passes the bat; hotspot in this case a red herring, the audio and front-on replay should be enough to anybody with common sense.

The one criticism I have of the DRS is we don't hear the conversation between the 3rd umpire and the on-field umpire - it would be interesting: who leads? who asks what questions? What exactly does the 3rd umpire say?

Good question : would love to see the transcript in this case ! In this case they clearly had a bit of a discussion , took quite a long time to decide ; so what did they use to clinch it ?
Presumably Hill said "I heard a sound - can you be sure it wasn't bat on ball ?" in which case surely his mate should have said well the sound doesn't fit with the alleged edge...and there is nothing on hotspot...
Wouldn't that be enough ? I shakes me head  

Won't do much to make the Indians keen on drs...

It reminds me of a decision during the West Indies vs England series which was I think one of the first times DRS was used (certainly the first time England had it) - can't remember who the batsman was, but he was given out caught down the leg-side attempting a pull shot, I think off Harmison; the replay clearly showed he'd missed the ball, but he was given out anyway - Harper on that occasion the 3rd umpire.

Are umpires too pent up on the technology? I wonder if there was too much focus on audio/hotspot in this case; take away all the audio and hotspot, and simply watch the front-on replay: Khawaja has missed it by a centimetre and a half.

I think unless its deffo OUT it has to go with the Batsman not the on field umpire..

Dorothy_Mantooth wrote:

Mike Selig wrote:92-2 at lunch then. In fairness England have bowled a lot better since the first wicket fell, but that moment of injustice has made what would have been Australia's session fairly even.

What's the solution re DRS then folks? It is meant to eradicate the howlers, but so far in this series it has failed at that 3 times (Broad not out first test, Rogers out last game, Khawaja now), and produced a howler from a perfectly good original call (Trott first test). You can argue human error all you like (whether from the umpires or the players taking the wrong reviews) but the point of DRS was to eradicate the drastic human errors was it not? At the moment at that it is failing, so what's the solution?

More training and better training for the umpires with clearer directives is an obvious start.

I think they have to change the mindset of the 3rd Umpire.  They should be trained to make their decision with NO thought of the on-field call.  So the 3rd Umpire for the Khawaja review, should simply be making his decision based on did he think it was out or not.  Not is there enough evidence to overturn?  

See I disagree with that mindset. There has to be conclusive evidence to overturn the umpires call for me.

This was human error.

Imagine the irony of getting rid of DRS because the umpires are human and it shows them up to much, just because it doesnt correct every wrong decision- yet corrects the majority!

Crazy !! Crazy

I don't mind the "benefit goes to the umpire" thing so much (that is a different debate). What I mind is someone being given out caught when the replays show he has missed the ball by more than a centimetre.

Perhaps specialist 3rd umpires is a solution - in rugby union for example the TMO is not a front line referee.

I am actually not too bothered over a couple of the errors which haven't been corrected in this series. Broad got away with a clear edge because the Australians wasted reviews on fishing expeditions - actually a good lesson for them. And the Rogers lbw probably would never have been reviewed , as it was such a bizarre event in the first place and clearly the batsman didn't have a clue where the ball was anyway !
But this one does bother me. As did the Trott case ; because both are instances where common sense application of the guidelines would have meant a fair result.
OK the Trott decision owed something to a technical problem , but still sensible umpiring would have got it right : and this one is just plain bad !

It should be noted that DRS , properly used , has corrected several errors in this series : so it isn't really system failure. Just human error. As always.

Unfortunately the Aussies are getting the worst of it , as usually happens to the side which is struggling. So they are getting upset , and the controversies are getting a lot of attention

Listening to TMS and the Old Trafford Tannoy is doing my head in!

The only way to erradicate it is to get rid off umpires call in every respect or this will go on forever. I personally don't mind it- But there are just to many that do mind it and I understand there view as well. We have DRS and UDRS for a reason, and that is because umpires make mistakes.. That is - therefore it goes against any logic to have umpitres call on anything.

Yes people will argue its all about Howlers- I dont buy that. Its about improving and imporving all the time and making the game as fair and just as possible..

Mike Selig wrote:

Perhaps specialist 3rd umpires is a solution - in rugby union for example the TMO is not a front line referee.

Certainly would help, but even in Rugby there are still some very contentious decisions made by the TV Ref.

I also think it is worth remembering that DRS has done more good than harm in this series. The only time it has done any harm was in overturning the correct Trott decision (and possibly arguably in giving Hughes out LBW to Swann), whereas several times it has corrected errors. The errors it has failed to correct would have happened without DRS by definition.

So, on the whole, DRS is still better than no DRS.

BUT... the kind of decision made today does leave a sour taste in the mouth, because it is EXACTLY the kind of decision DRS was brought in to correct, so today DRS (or rather the person using it) failed to do its job. That is a problem.

And I think banging the human error drum to some extent is not helpful - the question is how can we better implement DRS so the chances of something like today are minimal.

mystiroakey wrote:The only way to erradicate it is to get rid off umpires call in every respect  or this will go on forever. I personally don't mind it- But there are just to many that do mind it and I understand there view as well. We have DRS and UDRS for a reason, and that is because umpires make mistakes.. That is - therefore it goes against any logic to have umpitres call on anything.

Yes people will argue its all about Howlers- I dont buy that. Its about improving and imporving all the time and making the game as fair and just as possible..

Have to disagree there. Umpires, by and large still get the majority of calls right.

I don't believe DRS was introduced with the thought of eradicating any and all mistakes. For starters, the system isn't perfect and doesn't always provide conclusive evidence...hence the "Umpire's Call" option.

Given the system isn't perfect (and likely never will be), for me, this is the biggest argument in favour of only using DRS in situations where you are certain the umpire has made a howler OR in situations where it doesn't matter if you waste a review.

That said - as we've just seen, even DRS won't prevent howlers if the umpires can't use the system properly.

Judicious use of DRS puts less pressure on everybody - players and umpires alike - and also helps maintain the umpires' status as the ultimate authority...lets be honest, by and large they don't do a bad job.

Well we need snicko in- And they are working on making it quicker so it can be used soon enough. However there must be something hawkeye can do inreagrds to tracking the ball at impact or not impact.. The revs will change on the ball.

dyrewolfe wrote:

mystiroakey wrote:The only way to erradicate it is to get rid off umpires call in every respect  or this will go on forever. I personally don't mind it- But there are just to many that do mind it and I understand there view as well. We have DRS and UDRS for a reason, and that is because umpires make mistakes.. That is - therefore it goes against any logic to have umpitres call on anything.

Yes people will argue its all about Howlers- I dont buy that. Its about improving and imporving all the time and making the game as fair and just as possible..

Have to disagree there. Umpires, by and large still get the majority of calls right.

I don't believe DRS was introduced with the thought of eradicating any and all mistakes. For starters, the system isn't perfect and doesn't always provide conclusive evidence...hence the "Umpire's Call" option.

Given the system isn't perfect (and likely never will be), for me, this is the biggest argument in favour of only using DRS in situations where you are certain the umpire has made a howler OR in situations where it doesn't matter if you waste a review.

That said - as we've just seen, even DRS won't prevent howlers if the umpires can't use the system properly.

Judicious use of DRS puts less pressure on everybody - players and umpires alike - and also helps maintain the umpires' status as the ultimate authority...lets be honest, by and large they don't do a bad job.

The umpires call has to go- its that simple. It is beyond ludicrous that someone can be in when a ball can be tracked to hit the stumps by 50% of its size , yet he could be out with 0.00001% of the ball hitting.

However as I have pointed out its still a system that improves what we had- so it has to stay even if it wont be improved upon. Howevevr I do think you are very wrong in your view about why technology is being brought in. It truely is there to be improved and improved upon. I have also heard the ICC making stratements on this. This is just the start. The future will be fairer and fairer and juster and juster

The hundred up for Australia. Clarke and Rogers have to build a partnership here. This pitch doesn't hold any real terror for the batsman and runs are there to be made. Australia will have to really apply themselves and make it count.
England have to keep at their task, although the track has no special help for the bowlers, its not looking like a road, and good, disciplined bowling can bring you wickets.

Rogers is looking good, has a massive point to prove. Looks set for a hundred. There going at a decent run rate too

mystiroakey wrote:The only way to erradicate it is to get rid off umpires call in every respect  or this will go on forever. I personally don't mind it- But there are just to many that do mind it and I understand there view as well. We have DRS and UDRS for a reason, and that is because umpires make mistakes.. That is - therefore it goes against any logic to have umpitres call on anything.

Yes people will argue its all about Howlers- I dont buy that. Its about improving and imporving all the time and making the game as fair and just as possible..

Totally agreed. Even by the traditions of the game that people use to defend umpire's call system, the benefit of doubt goes to the batsman.

Did rogers not review!!!

End of a fine innings for Rogers  

Well bowled Swann ..That looked pretty dead .

dyrewolfe wrote:

mystiroakey wrote:The only way to erradicate it is to get rid off umpires call in every respect  or this will go on forever. I personally don't mind it- But there are just to many that do mind it and I understand there view as well. We have DRS and UDRS for a reason, and that is because umpires make mistakes.. That is - therefore it goes against any logic to have umpitres call on anything.

Yes people will argue its all about Howlers- I dont buy that. Its about improving and imporving all the time and making the game as fair and just as possible..

Have to disagree there. Umpires, by and large still get the majority of calls right.

I don't believe DRS was introduced with the thought of eradicating any and all mistakes. For starters, the system isn't perfect and doesn't always provide conclusive evidence...hence the "Umpire's Call" option.

Given the system isn't perfect (and likely never will be), for me, this is the biggest argument in favour of only using DRS in situations where you are certain the umpire has made a howler OR in situations where it doesn't matter if you waste a review.

That said - as we've just seen, even DRS won't prevent howlers if the umpires can't use the system properly.

Judicious use of DRS puts less pressure on everybody - players and umpires alike - and also helps maintain the umpires' status as the ultimate authority...lets be honest, by and large they don't do a bad job.

What exactly constitutes a howler is a big question. The way Khawaja was beaten by that Swann ball, on first viewing, there was a chance he could be given out as the ball went pass the bat closely, it wasn't a stupid appeal. The onfield umpire got it wrong and gave him out though the ball was close to the bat. Then the 3rd umpire somehow gave it out. Where do we set the boundary between a howler and a reasonable decision? Is there something like a reasonable wrong decision? Try telling that to Khawaja that it was reasonable that he was given out as the ball went pass the bat rather closely though he didn't really hit it!.

Well played Rogers, fine 84!

128-3, big partnership here for Australia. Need Clarke to get a biggie

Rogers misses a straight one. Has a chat with Clarke who I think asks "did you hit it?", and when Rogers shakes his head tells him that it's not worth reviewing it. Good call too as it's crashing into middle-and-leg. Swann has two already. Rogers played well, but Australia's wait for their first century goes on...

Rogers played well. and proves he can use DRS(or not use it as the case may be!!)

Swann making a significant impact even on a day one pitch. He has looked better than he did in the other 2 games. Even he wasn't at his best, the Australians found Swanny to be quite a handful, they wouldn't want to think about Swann at his best.
Perhaps Rogers should have called for a review, there was a good chance he would have somehow got away with it though he looked dead plumb!!!!.

certainly some spin for Swann today, bowling nicely too, into the red more often than not. Certainly a great toss to win for Aus, providing they can make a good score first up.

Another big threat gone with the fall of Rogers' wicket. Unlucky to go just 16 shy of his ton, though he had been looking a tad nervy.

Good work from Swann to get the wicket...he could end up having a field day.

Khawaja's dismissal will be another day of bad press for DRS when it shouldn't be so. Like Trott's dismissal in the first Test, it wasn't the fault of DRS, it was the fault of a blind 3rd umpire. Still, I suppose it's all evened out now.

England marginally on top at the moment, it does look a good wicket for batting with enough to keep the bowlers interested. Spin will certainly come into the equation later on, and maybe not too much later on.

ooo Smith is a lucky man there, that looked out live, but slightly less than half the ball is hiting leg stump and he survives.

Jesus that's close

msp83 wrote:

dyrewolfe wrote:

mystiroakey wrote:The only way to erradicate it is to get rid off umpires call in every respect  or this will go on forever. I personally don't mind it- But there are just to many that do mind it and I understand there view as well. We have DRS and UDRS for a reason, and that is because umpires make mistakes.. That is - therefore it goes against any logic to have umpitres call on anything.

Yes people will argue its all about Howlers- I dont buy that. Its about improving and imporving all the time and making the game as fair and just as possible..

Have to disagree there. Umpires, by and large still get the majority of calls right.

I don't believe DRS was introduced with the thought of eradicating any and all mistakes. For starters, the system isn't perfect and doesn't always provide conclusive evidence...hence the "Umpire's Call" option.

Given the system isn't perfect (and likely never will be), for me, this is the biggest argument in favour of only using DRS in situations where you are certain the umpire has made a howler OR in situations where it doesn't matter if you waste a review.

That said - as we've just seen, even DRS won't prevent howlers if the umpires can't use the system properly.

Judicious use of DRS puts less pressure on everybody - players and umpires alike - and also helps maintain the umpires' status as the ultimate authority...lets be honest, by and large they don't do a bad job.

What exactly constitutes a howler is a big question. The way Khawaja was beaten by that Swann ball, on first viewing, there was a chance he could be given out as the ball went pass the bat closely, it wasn't a stupid appeal. The onfield umpire got it wrong and gave him out though the ball was close to the bat. Then the 3rd umpire somehow gave it out. Where do we set the boundary between a howler and a reasonable decision? Is there something like a reasonable wrong decision? Try telling that to Khawaja that it was reasonable that he was given out as the ball went pass the bat rather closely though he didn't really hit it!.

I think most people are calling the 3rd umpire's decision the howler.

Its easy for the on-field umpire to miss something in a split second.

What everyone is up in arms about is that the 3rd umpire has video replays and Hotspot to assist him and which should have made it easy to overturn the on-field umpire's decision and give Khawaja not out.

Clarke has moved along to 39. England would do well to pick him up early, ones set, he really can play a daddy innings.

Clarke has certainly had his few moments of good fortune, but he's played really positively so far, and I like the way he's trying to get after Swann.

Unable to watch today but looking forward to seeing the highlights tonight.

From all your comments, it seems like I'm going to have a very tough job in supporting the third umpire which has generally been my stance so far!

As msp suggests, I reckon a lot now depends on Clarke's performance with the bat ....

Michael Clarke reaches 50.

We allways support the 3d umpire Guilford- just not when they make a bad decision. Which has happened twice this series!!

mystiroakey wrote:We allways support the 3d umpire Guilford- just not when they make a bad decision. Which has happened twice this series!!

I'm glad at least that people seem to have stopped banging on about the Agar ''stumping'' which was correctly called not out in my view.

50 up for Clarke and he's looking pretty good here...well set to rack up a big, juicy ton...or even a double.

Ball threatening to reverse a bit for Bres, time to get Anderson on for a short burst?

guildfordbat wrote:

mystiroakey wrote:We allways support the 3d umpire Guilford- just not when they make a bad decision. Which has happened twice this series!!

I'm glad at least that people seem to have stopped banging on about the Agar ''stumping'' which was correctly called not out in my view.

The point about the Agar stumping wasnt that it wasnt out. Its the fact it couldnt be proved out(therefore I backed up the third umpire).

However If we had a floor camera I would bet that it was out.

dyrewolfe wrote:50 up for Clarke and he's looking pretty good here...well set to rack up a big, juicy ton...or even a double.

I hope for the Aussies' sakes that Clarke isn't thinking like that. 10 runs at a time ....

Superb day so far, what the ashes is all about!!!!

Love it!

Swann been our key man today, again showing that he is one of the worlds best spinners.

mystiroakey wrote:

However If we had a floor camera I would bet that it was out.

Yes, but we didn't and hence it was correctly called on what could be seen. We actually agree but the vast majority on here didn't at the time. Anyway have to go now. Back this evening when I've seen the highlights.

NickisBHAFC wrote:Superb day so far, what the ashes is all about!!!!

Love it!

Swann been our key man today, again showing that he is one of the worlds best spinners.

I think it will be very interesting to see how cricket history judges Swann. He'll certainly be towards the top but I wonder if playing at the time of DRS will be regarded as giving him such an advantage over the likes of Gibbs that comparisons are impossible to make ....

100% a nick there, why isn't hot spot showing it?

Just about to say Anderson not at the races today, problems with his run-up etc., then he gets a ruddy wicket!

Can do away with Hotspot, that's a clear edge!!

hot spot isnt working today- seriously this is bad tech- we need snicko in quick

This technology is rubbish, wrecking Cricket IMO. Why use it? Just lets every down all the time. 

Go back to the old days, proper cricket.

Its just hot spot. hawkeye need to do something about this quick and make a soloution

This is just awful.

Who the bloody hell is in the 3rd umpire's chair? Two atrocious, atrocious decisions in 4 hours. Disgusting. This is meant to be the pinnacle of cricket, it's a bloody laughing stock.

Once more, there's nothing wrong with DRS, it's the 3rd umpire.