Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Zainub Razvi The theory here is to allow using hawk eye as guide, not as a definative verdict giver. So, even if Hawk Eye is adopted, players will have to, eventually act according to what the umpires thinks, like as you say they have doing for 100s of years. |
However, Zainub, if Hawkeye is actually made available to umpires, perhaps by them carrying a palm device in their increasingly bulky white coats, it would be a very brave umpire who refused to consult it when an LBW appeal was made and a braver one still who over-ruled it. In effect, I rather think that, if this is made available to the umpires, the judgmental issues which are presently involved in LBW decisions will be gone forever, and the umpire will, in this respect at least, have been replaced by a box of electronics.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Zainub Razvi Then, there is also the question of if Hawk Eye will be too expensive to get into place for first class-cricket (if you adopt it at test level, you would automatically have to adopt it at four day level too, wouldn't you?). |
Well, not necessarily. All the electronic gizmos which are presently available to third umpires (replays, principally) are governed by the ICC regulations for tests and ODIs, not the Laws of Cricket. Some domestic competitions may also use them, but I'd be prepared to bet that the rules of those competitions only require the replays to be made available if the match is being televised (as do the ICC regulations). In the UK, where very little domestic cricket is televised, we would have to draft the regulation in this way: it is not the cricket authorities which provide the replay cameras for the umpires and Hawkeye for the TV fans, but the TV companies, and we cannot force them to attend games which they are not broadcasting. This brings me to one of my hobby-horses: it is illogical to introduce regulations, technology or umpiring methods at the top level of the game if they cannot also be introduced at lower levels (as you imply). That, for me, is as good a reason as any for minimising the amount of technological assistance which is available to umpires: if my local club can manage without it, test players with the assistance of the best umpires in the world should also be able to get along just fine.