Arthur Crabtree wrote:Durhamfootman wrote:
It's a nonsense. Losing hot spot is neither here nor there....... it is just muddying the waters to disguise the real problem with the system, which is the players themselves.
The umpires use all the systems together to make a decision, so to me it does matter there's no hot spot, as they will never get DRS to work if they are changing the way the separate elements work together. And hot spot is useful, as it gives you a definite positive (though not a definite negative) which snicko doesn't do. But I agree that the players are part of the problem. As well as commentators, who could explain the misunderstandings to the public, if they only understood it themselves. How much harm to the system do Botham and Holding do, who are basically describing the system they want (which changes by the hour), as well as trashing the reputation and confidence of the umpire.
of course I agree with that. but the point I am making is that everyone will focus on hot spot, or rather it's absence, and ignore completely the effect on the game of Cook referring a decision because he hopes it will get Clarke out, or Clarke referring because he hopes it will get Bell out, rather than because they are certain the decision was wrong. How many times have we heard commentators saying that Bell (or whoever) might as well refer an lbw decision because there is only the tail to come. What kind of nonsense is that? Then they'll criticise CA for not having hotspot to see if he got a feather of an inside edge, when the batsman clearly didn't or he would have referred without having to spend 3 minutes consulting with his partner to see if it is worth risking a review.
That's where the main problem lies with DRS. Add in the definitive nature of the graphics used by hawkeye, to illustrate a 'best guess' scenario, and it isn't surprising that the system is continually being discredited.
