India tour of Australia 17 Dec - 19 Jan: Tests

[alfie]

Aussies haven't thrown the towel in this morning. No silly stuff (apart from some dodgy running) , battled away to scratch the lead up over fifty. Cummins got a snorter , Green mistimed a pull after a long resistance...but Starc and Lyon are still hanging on.
Starc appeared to be gone then but the technology eventually saved him from either means of dismissal...somewhat to his own surprise ?
More fuel for the drs debate perhaps.

Lyon gone now so won't be much longer. Siraj has three ...useful debut , this.

[alfie]

All out on the stroke of (delayed) lunch. India to need 70 for a series levelling win.

Shouldn't be a problem. But at least the crowd will have had a decent amount of play for their money today .

Australia made 200 in 103 overs...which must be the slowest scoring for them on home pitches in decades. Understandable given the situation but debate will go on locally as to whether they are adopting too defensive an approach (Michael Slater has already ignited that issue in a couple of pieces) . India clearly like their own tactics of strangling the Aussie scoring...and it seems to be working well for them in this series.

Return of Warner next week might signal a bit of a change.

[alfie]

Comfortable eight wicket win for India.

Rahane solid again after two early wickets and young Gill continues to impress with a rapid 35 not out. Huge comeback for India after the disintegration of Adelaide

One all and suddenly it is Australia with the team selection headaches. Shaping up as a fine series..Wonder where the third match will be played ?

[sussexpob]

I thought it was in Sydney, has it changed? Why is the third test not in the usual NYs Day slot either way?

Credit to the Indian side for coming back from their steamrolling in the first test and showing character to win here. Credit also to the Aussie tail today for making a match of it and making India work for it, of course they needed a miracle but adding near 100 runs is showing great fight at the end.

Got a feeling this might be a banger of a final 2 tests. Been a real throw back series this, ball dominating bat, every run needing to be earned. Is it just me who prefers this sort of cricket over those boring games we have got in Aus recently where the home team's even mediocre side act players wrack up massive scores? Lets have more pitches like this please.

[alfie]

Sydney currently experiencing what for Australia is an alarming number of Covid cases at present. Partial area lockdowns etc...and the Queensland Premier may not allow players/officials/broadcast staff etc into Brisbane for the fourth Test after they play in Sydney - depending on case numbers , tracing etc.
So naturally a fair bit of concern over whether to risk going into Sydney at all. decision expected imminently.

Cheeky suggestion from NSW that the best solution was to say OK we will do the fourth game as well so Queensland aren't bothered

But looking most likely Melbourne will host the third game . We should know soon.

[sussexpob]

I'm not sure. Paine got a bit of a rough one (I have no sympathy, it was a bloody awful shot playing away from his body against one that should have been left), but nothing on hotspot and a dubious spike on snicko

This is one of those situations where Snicko almost certainly makes the right call, but the media and commentators who have a poor understanding of the technology and how it works will cry foul that the tech hasnt worked or put forward rather clueless explanations. Brett Lee, Shane Warne and one other I cant remember who, all gave conspiracy theories as to why the technology was wrong, all were talking rubbish, but that is then mirrored in the world press. Just google Paine, edge, snicko.... there are 100s of articles around the world bemoaning the injustice his dismissal caused. So in a way, even though snicko provides the context for the right decision when everything else was inconclusive, its an example of why the system is frankly terrible in general.

The problem is with snicko that people dont have any clue about soundwaves, oscillators, amplification or what not. So over the years there is an inbuilt coping mechanism that exists where people identify certain types of spikes on snicko to mean certain things. Yesterday to knick your phrasing, the spike was "dubious" . This is because for 20 odd years watching cricket people have engineered themselves to understanding that certain sounds around the wicket produce certain sound waves, and that way we can tell when the ball hits an edge, or hits a glove, or bat hits a pad, etc. In reality, this isnt the case. In Paine's dismissal the only real question should be "is there a sound at all". Forget if it looks like one off those magnificent massive amplitude, high frequency waves where the white line goes all the way to the top..... was there a sound? As soon as you register one, and as soon as you can confirm that this sound is not bat hitting a pad, ground, ball striking a piece of sleeves, etc.... got to give it out.

The Aussie commentators for instance stated it could be his feet shuffling on the grounds; which is laughable nonsense. Its suffice to say without getting technical that the contact force producing such a sound would not be limited to a time scope of one frames of tv. Say if the camera has 30 fps, thats contact has produced a sound only detectable in a time frame of 0.03 seconds. I think again its suffice to say in this case that no one can produce such a precise and quick movement with their feet. Worth noting that a spinner bowling at 50mph might lose about 50% of pace when pitching, and the edge of a bat is 4cm's at its largest in the rulebook. All contact with the edge in this situation would be over in 0.003 seconds. So well within one frame. He's definitely edge it, absolutely no question.

[alfie]

Yes I didn't buy the shuffled feet argument...the problem with this case though was the apparent complete absence of a mark on hot spot. Which does seem contradictory.

After all : If we can't rely on hotspot - is it just an expensive waste of technology ? We could just use the sound cues...but hot spot seems (usually ) to be the favoured arbiter.

Despite your well reasoned post on the sound waves , Sussex , I have certainly seen additional squiggles on Snicko at various times in the past - all apparently irrelevant ; but never explained . So I am not totally convinced that Snicko alone should decide all cases of "did it hit the bat". On balance I believe the best (or least worst) method of deciding review is to furnish the TV umpire with all the available gizmos - including close up vision - and let him decide on the balance of probabilities. (Accepting that perfection is beyond human expertise - even with the assistance of gadgets)

Which is actually what is supposed to happen. Different TV umpires do the job better or worse : it is a skill set of its own , I think. But then again , so do on field umpires...

For the record , I thought Paine hit it. But a very competent umpire much closer than I , didn't. If the not out had not been overturned , I would not have cried foul.

[Red Devil]

For what it's worth I thought the real drs controversy should have been starc being given not out to Ashwin with the carrom ball that was knocking out the top of leg and middle but stayed not out because of umpires call.

We need a campaign to scrap the umpires call!

[Red Devil]

I thought it was in Sydney, has it changed? Why is the third test not in the usual NYs Day slot either way?

Credit to the Indian side for coming back from their steamrolling in the first test and showing character to win here. Credit also to the Aussie tail today for making a match of it and making India work for it, of course they needed a miracle but adding near 100 runs is showing great fight at the end.

Got a feeling this might be a banger of a final 2 tests. Been a real throw back series this, ball dominating bat, every run needing to be earned. Is it just me who prefers this sort of cricket over those boring games we have got in Aus recently where the home team's even mediocre side act players wrack up massive scores? Lets have more pitches like this please.

Absolutely. It was a great response after the last test - the 2 debutants looked good. Entertaining series and apart from that one hour in Adelaide India have been on top, which is a nice surprise!

Another injured quickie though is a concern for the next 2 tests - no Ishant, Shami, Umesh, Bhuvi or Hardik now so looks like there will be another debut for a seamer in Sydney - dropping like flies!

[DiligentDefence]

Personally I feel hot spot is too unreliable as it seems to have problems with very fine edges and very hot conditions. I would not bother with it.

[alfie]

News just in that they are going ahead with the Test in Sydney - with some elaborate bubble wrap precautions for players , staff , broadcasters etc. Apparently they've been able to reassure Queensland that they won't launch The Plague on the Sunshine State in a couple of weeks. Which is a good thing as I think we all like to see matches played at different grounds where possible. Although some Melbourne journos will be disappointed...

Just hope nobody messes up and breaks the bubble or the fur will fly between Anastacia and Gladys

[sussexpob]

the problem with this case though was the apparent complete absence of a mark on hot spot. Which does seem contradictory.

I dont know enough about hotspots science to comment on its accuracy generally, but series like the 2013 Ashes it was absolutely clear that both teams sussed out at the time that silicone tape on the edges of bats stopped the friction heat being detectable. I have seen critique of hotspot saying Vaseline or certain oils for wood that they treat the bat with can have similar effects, and I think in this series I can only remember hotspot picking up marks on the face (like Starc) or gloves (as with Kohli). I am more than dubious that hotspot works all the time, I have seen loads of example of clear edges it doesnt pick up. I think you have to ignore it and go with the sound.

Despite your well reasoned post on the sound waves , Sussex , I have certainly seen additional squiggles on Snicko at various times in the past - all apparently irrelevant ; but never explained . So I am not totally convinced that Snicko alone should decide all cases of "did it hit the bat".

The problem is, such squiggles might look irrelevant to people because they are ingrained into thinking they are looking for something of a particular form. I have seen the ICC advice to umpires (they no longer post it) in the past for instance where it explains you need a fat oscillation for a pad hit, or a tiny snick will produce a thin, tall peak in the oscillator. Generally this has some truth, but it cant be applied as a blanket rule.

Snicko uses a really sensitive microphone and amplifies the signals it receives so they are detectable on the oscillator more visually. The problem is, a microphone is going to be picking up everything in the background, so in order to cancel out all the sound that is irrelevant you need to put some type of filter on it. They would almost certainly use a bandpass filter/resonance filter where the high pass is cut into the amplifier, and then the low pass cut after amplification. Amplification gain itself naturally limits gain on extreme frequencies, so the bottom line is you end up cutting the interfering sound, but visual interpretation of the sound you get on the oscillator is not raw. It is adapted. I would have to guess that the audio setup is not consistent, because certain environments, stadiums, countries, crowd size etc produce different levels and types of background noise, so the filter parameters would have to change for the acoustic environment the match is played in. This means that the exact same edge will look different on the wave everytime, with simple filter differences.

To the layman, they see a small soundwave that barely registers and assume the sound signal itself must be soft. So they equate larger amplitude waves with contact force. In actuality, this could be a simple level of amplification. If I turn the gain up on an amplifier and leave it off on another, the same edge in one would look huge, the other it wouldnt register at all. So you cannot really rely on the amplitude of the wave to signify something significant.

You can actually see the filtration taking place on background noise level before the ball reaches the batsman. It is pretty much always flatline or very gentle murmur. So when you consider the microphone is registering nothing despite the wicket keeper breathing or moving next to the mike, the batsman shuffling in the crease, any wind or background noise. Nothing. So it begs the question where does the disturbance come from that suddenly registers? Some people argue it could be the pressure of the air hitting the bat if the ball goes close, such a contact would not register though. It would not appear on an oscillator.

If you look at a standard snicko regulation knick you get a high frequency/high amplitude spike followed by a lowering of both down to a murmur. The envelope of the sound has zero attack (the peak amplitude is the moment of contact), short decay and release, and a sustain envelope that is carried by lower frequency, lower amplitude waves that are longer. As the attack/decay phase are in higher frequency bands, what you might actually find is a high pass filter might eradicate all of that from snicko in some cases, and the release phase being in very low frequency ranges would be filtered out by the low pass. What you would be left with would be a lowish murmur, the dying embers of the sound, wobbling on snicko as these are the only sounds in the range that arent filtered.

I appreciate this might be double dutch to you, but in short, there is very little justification in situations of bat/ball contacts with nothing else in play where snicko registers a clear murmur that would not state with absolute authority that contact has been made. The pictures are pasted over the audio (well maybe visa versa) manually as they are seperate channels, so sometimes they are a frame or two out. Maybe if it clearly doesnt touch the bat you can attribute those sounds to a subsequent delayed contact, like it flicking a pocket or the thigh pad. But I dont have an example of that to hand.

[sussexpob]

The acute problem with snicko comes with the Starc situation; bat/pad, bat/ground, ball onto clothing, etc. Because in the former situation as demonstrated, the presence of a simple sound should be enough. But when you have to differentiate between sounds and ascertain them to a type of contact, all hell breaks loose. Snicko is simply not up for the job for reasons posted.

You cant really in the attack phase of any type of contact on snicko get much of a sense of frequency as the compressed visual aid is not detailed enough. This is the problem, because umpires are being instructed that different amplitudes in essence are different sounds; amplitude just governs how loud a sound is, not its pitch or timbre. You cannot therefore make any hypothesis about what something hits based on a simple loudness metric. Balls that thunder into pads obviously are going to produce louder sounds, but not every ball does. Not every bat contact is an edge. The general rule starts to fail us in anything but the most obvious of cases.

Starc was out, almost certainly. If you were to analyze the ball, I think he hits either his foot or the ground, producing a big sound. A sound registers as the ball passes the face, his bat is by this stage no longer in contact with ground nor foot nor pad. It has to be an edge. You then pick up the ball hitting his leg after. He damn well knew it too, he was halfway back to the pavillion, he knows he hit it. But the umpire is once again thinking that sound is not an edge, its not the edgy type he thinks hes looking for. For me, this is a disaster decision, its 100% got to be out.

In fact the same type of murmur in both Paine and Starc's cases, being registered in similar visual ways, at similar points past the edge, very strongly indicate a dramatic high pass cut off on the filter. This is the only way it makes sense, two identical instances, to identical sounds.

I think he got very lucky. Maybe cant blame the umpire, its not his fault his tools are crap.

[sussexpob]

It is amazing in fact that the ICC still use this nonsense tech. I have seen studies where a few groups of scientists have essentially identified with very little prolonged effort sound recognition systems for cricket specifically that are fully automated that have produced 99.5% accuracy. And that's only using a very small sample database as a reference, with tweaking and development you could get an automatic no umpire needed system even closer to 100 percent which costs nothing and is just as easy to produce.

Why are they sticking with a dinosaur system that is so bad? Its so infuriating, I cant stand the blood thing.

[GarlicJam]

3rd test to be played in Sydney.