Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Idle Polls Inc: DRS (again)
52 views
Skip to first unread message
alvey
Jun 30, 2012, 5:16:53 PM6/30/12
to
No caveats, just a Yes or No.
Q. Do you believe that the existing DRS is a better decision maker than
than anyone from the EUP?
A. Yes.
---------------------------------------
They're just bonuses that it also;
a) stops players and Board from bullying umpires.
b) totally removes the possibility of an umpire being criminally bought.
alvey
Q. Do you believe that the existing DRS is a better decision maker than
than anyone from the EUP?
A. Yes.
---------------------------------------
They're just bonuses that it also;
a) stops players and Board from bullying umpires.
b) totally removes the possibility of an umpire being criminally bought.
alvey
Mike Holmans
Jun 30, 2012, 5:19:26 PM6/30/12
to
On Sun, 1 Jul 2012 07:16:53 +1000, alvey <al...@atattat.com> tapped
the keyboard and brought forth:
>No caveats, just a Yes or No.
>
>Q. Do you believe that the existing DRS is a better decision maker than
>than anyone from the EUP?
>
>A. Yes.
Yes.
Cheers,
Mike
--
the keyboard and brought forth:
>No caveats, just a Yes or No.
>
>Q. Do you believe that the existing DRS is a better decision maker than
>than anyone from the EUP?
>
>A. Yes.
Cheers,
Mike
--
Mike Holmans
Jun 30, 2012, 5:49:16 PM6/30/12
to
On Sat, 30 Jun 2012 22:19:26 +0100, Mike Holmans
<mi...@jackalope.demon.co.uk> tapped the keyboard and brought forth:
Although technically the question is wrong because DRS does not make
decisions.
But I would still be answering "Yes" if the question were "Do you
believe that someone from the EUP assisted by the existing DRS is a
better decision maker than anyone from the EUP not assisted by the
existing DRS?", which would more truly represent the state of affairs
we are discussing.
Cheers,
Mike
--
<mi...@jackalope.demon.co.uk> tapped the keyboard and brought forth:
decisions.
But I would still be answering "Yes" if the question were "Do you
believe that someone from the EUP assisted by the existing DRS is a
better decision maker than anyone from the EUP not assisted by the
existing DRS?", which would more truly represent the state of affairs
we are discussing.
Cheers,
Mike
--
alvey
Jun 30, 2012, 6:06:32 PM6/30/12
to
On Sat, 30 Jun 2012 22:49:16 +0100, Mike Holmans wrote:
> On Sat, 30 Jun 2012 22:19:26 +0100, Mike Holmans
> <mi...@jackalope.demon.co.uk> tapped the keyboard and brought forth:
>
>>On Sun, 1 Jul 2012 07:16:53 +1000, alvey <al...@atattat.com> tapped
>>the keyboard and brought forth:
>>
>>>No caveats, just a Yes or No.
>>>
>>>Q. Do you believe that the existing DRS is a better decision maker than
>>>than anyone from the EUP?
>>>
>>>A. Yes.
>>
>>Yes.
>>
>
> Although technically the question is wrong because DRS does not make
> decisions.
Lookout Andrew D! Someone's mounting a challenge to your position of Pedant
> On Sat, 30 Jun 2012 22:19:26 +0100, Mike Holmans
> <mi...@jackalope.demon.co.uk> tapped the keyboard and brought forth:
>
>>On Sun, 1 Jul 2012 07:16:53 +1000, alvey <al...@atattat.com> tapped
>>the keyboard and brought forth:
>>
>>>No caveats, just a Yes or No.
>>>
>>>Q. Do you believe that the existing DRS is a better decision maker than
>>>than anyone from the EUP?
>>>
>>>A. Yes.
>>
>>Yes.
>>
>
> Although technically the question is wrong because DRS does not make
> decisions.
in Residence.
jzfredricks
Jun 30, 2012, 6:28:56 PM6/30/12
to
On Sunday, July 1, 2012 7:16:53 AM UTC+10, alvey wrote:
> No caveats, just a Yes or No.
>
> Q. Do you believe that the existing DRS is a better decision maker than
> than anyone from the EUP?
>
> A. Yes.
Yes, bring on unlimited referrals please.
> No caveats, just a Yes or No.
>
> Q. Do you believe that the existing DRS is a better decision maker than
> than anyone from the EUP?
>
> A. Yes.
dechucka
Jun 30, 2012, 8:49:09 PM6/30/12
to
"jzfredricks" <jzfre...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:0e5cc2a3-73b5-4b46...@googlegroups.com...
>
jzfredricks
Jun 30, 2012, 10:07:15 PM6/30/12
to dechucka
On Sunday, July 1, 2012 10:49:09 AM UTC+10, dechucka wrote:
> > Yes, bring on unlimited referrals please.
>
> with 20 run penalty if you are wrong
Yeah, I think a runs penalty will the best way to manage it. 20 might be a bit much, though.
> > Yes, bring on unlimited referrals please.
>
> with 20 run penalty if you are wrong
dechucka
Jun 30, 2012, 10:28:10 PM6/30/12
to
news:73652b20-0ceb-4036...@googlegroups.com...
Ok, just want to stop excessive referals
>
>
jzfredricks
Jun 30, 2012, 11:26:58 PM6/30/12
to dechucka
On Sunday, July 1, 2012 12:28:10 PM UTC+10, dechucka wrote:
> Ok, just want to stop excessive referals
Of course. Btw, you didn't vote!
> Ok, just want to stop excessive referals
Andrew Dunford
Jul 1, 2012, 6:04:27 AM7/1/12
to
"alvey" <al...@atattat.com> wrote in message
news:yah1lj8yrg4v$.xjdtw94saxnb.dlg@40tude.net...
pedant.
Question on your question: what exactly is the existing DRS? Do you mean
with all its technology bells and whistles, or simply the fact that
decisions can be referred?
Andrew
Mike Holmans
Jul 1, 2012, 8:06:40 AM7/1/12
to
On Sun, 1 Jul 2012 22:04:27 +1200, "Andrew Dunford"
<adun...@artifax.net> tapped the keyboard and brought forth:
Alvey is presumably taking a passing interest in the EvA odos. I think
it reasonable to assume that he is referring to the DRS in force for
that series.
Cheers,
Mike
--
<adun...@artifax.net> tapped the keyboard and brought forth:
it reasonable to assume that he is referring to the DRS in force for
that series.
Cheers,
Mike
--
jzfredricks
Jul 1, 2012, 8:10:46 AM7/1/12
to
On Sunday, July 1, 2012 8:04:27 PM UTC+10, Andrew Dunford wrote:
> Question on your question: what exactly is the existing DRS? Do you mean
> with all its technology bells and whistles, or simply the fact that
> decisions can be referred?
He means the former.
> Question on your question: what exactly is the existing DRS? Do you mean
> with all its technology bells and whistles, or simply the fact that
> decisions can be referred?
alvey
Jul 1, 2012, 4:06:58 PM7/1/12
to
The winnerrrr, and still champeen....
as
alvey
Jul 1, 2012, 4:09:09 PM7/1/12
to
THOROUGH & PUBIC TESTICLING has been done?
as
jzfredricks
Jul 1, 2012, 5:51:23 PM7/1/12
to
Unknown
Jul 1, 2012, 7:19:02 PM7/1/12
to
the decision can be based on evidence from the Do Rightly System.
max.it
alvey
Jul 1, 2012, 7:33:39 PM7/1/12
to
as
jzfredricks
Jul 1, 2012, 8:14:57 PM7/1/12
to
On Monday, July 2, 2012 9:33:39 AM UTC+10, alvey wrote:
> > > I'm confused. Isn't your position that DRS should be postponed until
> > > THOROUGH & PUBIC TESTICLING has been done?
> >
> > If you say so
>
> If that's not right then how about you tell me exactly what your position is on the question of whether DRS should be used now?
To save you from having to think too hard about ways to trap me into a complex admission about xEye, I'll say this - if the choice was between "Today's DRS, including xEye" and "no DRS at all", I'd choose the former 1000 times out of 1000.
> > > I'm confused. Isn't your position that DRS should be postponed until
> > > THOROUGH & PUBIC TESTICLING has been done?
> >
> > If you say so
>
> If that's not right then how about you tell me exactly what your position is on the question of whether DRS should be used now?
Similarly, if the choice was between "full body cancer and an afternoon with Alvey" and "immediate death" I'd choose the former.
If you're actually asking about what changes I'd make if I had total control over DRS, I'd do this;
a) All technologies mandatory for all Tests. Funding discussions to be had.
b) unlimited referrals with a 5 run penalty after 3 incorrect referrals
c) If there is uncertainty, Benefit of the Doubt is to got to the batsman, rather than the umpire's original decision. In these cases it doesn't count as a used/wasted/incorrect referral
d) Stop using xEye until thorough, public testing has been done to prove its accuracy
e) Once D is done, DRS regulations must take into account the proven accuracy/MoE. This would include a variable "umpire/doubt" zone at the stumps, based on impact distance/s
f) Same goes for Snicko. In particular the timing needs to be tested/proven, as well as some sound graph analysis (ball on willow vs ball on pad/cloth)
g) all Out decisions automatically referred
h) 3rd ump rules on front and back foot no-balls, allowing main ump to focus on batting area
I'm sure I'll think of more later!
alvey
Jul 1, 2012, 9:51:55 PM7/1/12
to
On Monday, July 2, 2012 10:14:57 AM UTC+10, jzfredricks wrote:
> On Monday, July 2, 2012 9:33:39 AM UTC+10, alvey wrote:
> > > > I'm confused. Isn't your position that DRS should be postponed until
> > > > THOROUGH & PUBIC TESTICLING has been done?
> > >
> > > If you say so
> >
> > If that's not right then how about you tell me exactly what your position is on the question of whether DRS should be used now?
>
> To save you from having to think too hard about ways to trap me into a complex admission about xEye,
Now, now JZ.
> On Monday, July 2, 2012 9:33:39 AM UTC+10, alvey wrote:
> > > > I'm confused. Isn't your position that DRS should be postponed until
> > > > THOROUGH & PUBIC TESTICLING has been done?
> > >
> > > If you say so
> >
> > If that's not right then how about you tell me exactly what your position is on the question of whether DRS should be used now?
>
> To save you from having to think too hard about ways to trap me into a complex admission about xEye,
Just because you're backed into a corner there's no need to get snarky.
>I'll say this - if the choice was between "Today's DRS, including xEye" and "no DRS at all", I'd choose the former 1000 times out of 1000.
snip unread
alvey
jzfredricks
Jul 1, 2012, 10:07:25 PM7/1/12
to
On Monday, July 2, 2012 11:51:55 AM UTC+10, alvey wrote:
> snip unread
haha, nice try
> snip unread
haha, nice try
Bob Dubery
Jul 2, 2012, 3:01:42 AM7/2/12
to
On Jun 30, 11:49 pm, Mike Holmans <m...@jackalope.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> But I would still be answering "Yes" if the question were "Do you
> believe that someone from the EUP assisted by the existing DRS is a
> better decision maker than anyone from the EUP not assisted by the
> existing DRS?", which would more truly represent the state of affairs
> we are discussing.
Yes to that question, and my reply to it would be "Yes".
> But I would still be answering "Yes" if the question were "Do you
> believe that someone from the EUP assisted by the existing DRS is a
> better decision maker than anyone from the EUP not assisted by the
> existing DRS?", which would more truly represent the state of affairs
> we are discussing.
Bob Dubery
Jul 2, 2012, 3:04:29 AM7/2/12
to
On Jul 1, 4:28 am, "dechucka" <dechuc...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Ok, just want to stop excessive referals
So the current system is good - though we might have a bit of an
> Ok, just want to stop excessive referals
argument about how many challenges a team has in the bank at the start
of the innings. If we have some version of the current system with
challenges staying in the bank as long as they are successful AND we
have excessive referrals then at least one of the umpires is having a
bad day and we should thank our lucky stars that DRS is in place.
alvey
Jul 2, 2012, 5:03:04 AM7/2/12
to
alvey
In Bne, making the easy conversion.
dechucka
Jul 2, 2012, 5:50:33 AM7/2/12
to
"Bob Dubery" <mega...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:b7746429-2b86-45d4...@j9g2000vbk.googlegroups.com...
agree with all that just don't want to see referals for every shout
Andrew Dunford
Jul 2, 2012, 5:52:49 AM7/2/12
to
news:73652b20-0ceb-4036...@googlegroups.com...
Each time the batting team refers unsuccessfully, an extra stump is added at
each end until the outer-most stump is off the cut strip on both sides of
the wicket. After that, for each unsuccessful referral the two batsmen must
complete a lap around the row of stumps before they can set off for a run.
Each time the fielding team refers unsuccessfully, the batting team is
permitted to widen their bats by one centimetre...
Andrew
each end until the outer-most stump is off the cut strip on both sides of
the wicket. After that, for each unsuccessful referral the two batsmen must
complete a lap around the row of stumps before they can set off for a run.
Each time the fielding team refers unsuccessfully, the batting team is
permitted to widen their bats by one centimetre...
Andrew
0 new messages