Black Caps in India
-
I tend to agree with those wanting DRS implemented - its not perfect but is an improvement. But BCCI's decisions are always driven by practical considerations ($$$$). That's where the BCCI reluctance stemmed from initially. Think about the number of test and ODI venues in India and the cost involved in implementing a tech solution that had only vendor. And that vendor refused to negotiate with the BCCI even a bit. And now they've sort of worked themselves into a corner of arrogance and won't change their position unless they get a fig-leaf. The much talked about adjustments to "Umpire's call" might do the trick. Hopefully anyway.
And also, no issues with those venting on bad decisions -its a fan's privilege - Shows you care!
Ever since John Wright's stint as India Coach, my soft corner for the Kiwi cricket team has only increased. Fleming was a jerk when he was playing though.
@newsjunkie said in Black Caps in India:
I tend to agree with those wanting DRS implemented - its not perfect but is an improvement. But BCCI's decisions are always driven by practical considerations ($$$$). That's where the BCCI reluctance stemmed from initially. Think about the number of test and ODI venues in India and the cost involved in implementing a tech solution that had only vendor. And that vendor refused to negotiate with the BCCI even a bit. And now they've sort of worked themselves into a corner of arrogance and won't change their position unless they get a fig-leaf. The much talked about adjustments to "Umpire's call" might do the trick. Hopefully anyway.
And also, no issues with those venting on bad decisions -its a fan's privilege - Shows you care!
Ever since John Wright's stint as India Coach, my soft corner for the Kiwi cricket team has only increased. Fleming was a jerk when he was playing though.
Not so much that the BCCI can't negotiate a deal but more that they won't get 5 spinners lbws an innings.
Tours outside India dont cost the BCCI any money for technology -
At the end of the day, we can't complain much about this test. We got ourselves into a position to get a first innings lead and haven't been good enough. Indian batsmen have shown the pitch wasn't a complete minefield.
Their batsmen have generally been better in these conditions so far in this match and so have their bowlers.
Depending on the threat of rain, I'd set us 400 - we won't get those runs on this pitch against their spinners, so pray for rain!
-
@newsjunkie said in Black Caps in India:
I tend to agree with those wanting DRS implemented - its not perfect but is an improvement. But BCCI's decisions are always driven by practical considerations ($$$$). That's where the BCCI reluctance stemmed from initially. Think about the number of test and ODI venues in India and the cost involved in implementing a tech solution that had only vendor. And that vendor refused to negotiate with the BCCI even a bit. And now they've sort of worked themselves into a corner of arrogance and won't change their position unless they get a fig-leaf. The much talked about adjustments to "Umpire's call" might do the trick. Hopefully anyway.
And also, no issues with those venting on bad decisions -its a fan's privilege - Shows you care!
Ever since John Wright's stint as India Coach, my soft corner for the Kiwi cricket team has only increased. Fleming was a jerk when he was playing though.
Not so much that the BCCI can't negotiate a deal but more that they won't get 5 spinners lbws an innings.
Tours outside India dont cost the BCCI any money for technology@Siam That's a bit one-eyed buddy. Not having DRS works against India as well when it comes to LBWs etc. A few close shouts already in the 2nd innings. Also keep in mind, India played one series (against SL) using DRS and the players were not happy about how the 'umpire's call' worked. Tendulkar and Dhoni were strongly against it. This gave BCCI enough paper cover to justify their dollar-driven decision.
And to address the question of why BCCI is able to reject DRS - the way ICC implemented the rule was that both playing teams have to agree for use of DRS, which BCCI has not. Not defending their stance, just attempting to explain it.
-
@Siam That's a bit one-eyed buddy. Not having DRS works against India as well when it comes to LBWs etc. A few close shouts already in the 2nd innings. Also keep in mind, India played one series (against SL) using DRS and the players were not happy about how the 'umpire's call' worked. Tendulkar and Dhoni were strongly against it. This gave BCCI enough paper cover to justify their dollar-driven decision.
And to address the question of why BCCI is able to reject DRS - the way ICC implemented the rule was that both playing teams have to agree for use of DRS, which BCCI has not. Not defending their stance, just attempting to explain it.
@newsjunkie said in Black Caps in India:
@Siam That's a bit one-eyed buddy. Not having DRS works against India as well when it comes to LBWs etc. A few close shouts already in the 2nd innings. Also keep in mind, India played one series (against SL) using DRS and the players were not happy about how the 'umpire's call' worked. Tendulkar and Dhoni were strongly against it. This gave BCCI enough paper cover to justify their dollar-driven decision.
And to address the question of why BCCI is able to reject DRS - the way ICC implemented the rule was that both playing teams have to agree for use of DRS, which BCCI has not. Not defending their stance, just attempting to explain it.
So the BCCI don't allow DRS because:
like Zimbabwe and the West Indies, they can't afford it - it's too expensive to get the tech companies to install it
2 ex players didn't like it so the rest of the world has to watch different formats and conditions depending on whose playing - now that's player power!
Because teams may opt out of using DRS, (thanks to the graciousness of the BCCI dominated ICC), and yet no two teams have agreed to opt out, not even Australia and England
But why does India insist that host countries MUST NOT use DRS?
Your explanation falls very short of being convincing but let's let the President of the BCCI, Anurag Thakur, explain it, since you're so keen on unbiased (two eyed) explanations:
http://www.espncricinfo.com/india/content/story/1052473.html
BCCI president Anurag Thakur has said that India is open to agreeing on a revised template for the Decision Review System (DRS) in matches, specifically that they may agree to the use of all non-predictive elements of the system if they can be "delinked" from Hawk-Eye's projections in lbw decisions.
"I said earlier also that you can have it partially without the lbw decisions, only for the rest of the decisions, Hawk-Eye and the rest of the stuff," Thakur said. "But we need to ask ourselves if a machine is making the same error which a human is making, what are we getting out of it?"
No mention of vendors, ICC driven consensus, retired players - he must have forgotten
Seems pretty LBW specific to me and that SURELY has nothing to do with the high number of LBW dismissals in India or the vociferous pleading that accompanies any delivery that comes into contact with a leg or pad.
Things that make you go hmmmm
-
Apparently they have already lost if you go on what the clowns at the Herald are reporting.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/sport/news/article.cfm?c_id=4&objectid=11716674
-
@newsjunkie said in Black Caps in India:
@Siam That's a bit one-eyed buddy. Not having DRS works against India as well when it comes to LBWs etc. A few close shouts already in the 2nd innings. Also keep in mind, India played one series (against SL) using DRS and the players were not happy about how the 'umpire's call' worked. Tendulkar and Dhoni were strongly against it. This gave BCCI enough paper cover to justify their dollar-driven decision.
And to address the question of why BCCI is able to reject DRS - the way ICC implemented the rule was that both playing teams have to agree for use of DRS, which BCCI has not. Not defending their stance, just attempting to explain it.
So the BCCI don't allow DRS because:
like Zimbabwe and the West Indies, they can't afford it - it's too expensive to get the tech companies to install it
2 ex players didn't like it so the rest of the world has to watch different formats and conditions depending on whose playing - now that's player power!
Because teams may opt out of using DRS, (thanks to the graciousness of the BCCI dominated ICC), and yet no two teams have agreed to opt out, not even Australia and England
But why does India insist that host countries MUST NOT use DRS?
Your explanation falls very short of being convincing but let's let the President of the BCCI, Anurag Thakur, explain it, since you're so keen on unbiased (two eyed) explanations:
http://www.espncricinfo.com/india/content/story/1052473.html
BCCI president Anurag Thakur has said that India is open to agreeing on a revised template for the Decision Review System (DRS) in matches, specifically that they may agree to the use of all non-predictive elements of the system if they can be "delinked" from Hawk-Eye's projections in lbw decisions.
"I said earlier also that you can have it partially without the lbw decisions, only for the rest of the decisions, Hawk-Eye and the rest of the stuff," Thakur said. "But we need to ask ourselves if a machine is making the same error which a human is making, what are we getting out of it?"
No mention of vendors, ICC driven consensus, retired players - he must have forgotten
Seems pretty LBW specific to me and that SURELY has nothing to do with the high number of LBW dismissals in India or the vociferous pleading that accompanies any delivery that comes into contact with a leg or pad.
Things that make you go hmmmm
Dude you can believe what you want. Hawkeye is the vendor I referred to earlier. Now BCCI is not going to say frankly that hey we were not able to negotiate favorable terms with Hawkeye so we don't want it. And they definitely can't get away with saying we don't support it because of the cost since they make billions of dollars in profit. If they accept it on away tours, they would have no justification to refuse it for home tours. They will hide behind platitudes about cricket, machine errors, and other PR statements. I even pointed out that now the players are supportive of DRS so the BCCI will probably end up accepting DRS in the near future.
I broke it down already in my previous posts. But if you want to believe in conspiracy theories about Lbws, then you can join those Pakistanis who believe 9/11 was a CIA conspiracy and that their cricket team only loses if their players fix matches.
-
Back to the cricket, enjoyed watching Williamson's batting. This guy is a quality player. And Ronchi is showing how even a limited player can do well against quality spin if you bat with a free mind and positive intent. The key is to not to over-do it like the Aussies tend to do - dancing down the wicket every second ball or trying to hit spinners out of the attack.
If Kiwis learn the right lessons from this test, there's still hope for some competitive cricket this series. India's batsmen are immature and undisciplined enough to give plenty of opportunities. But they need others to stand up with the bat. I think they should give Guptill a longer rope and stick with him. Not sure that will happen though.
-
Dude you can believe what you want. Hawkeye is the vendor I referred to earlier. Now BCCI is not going to say frankly that hey we were not able to negotiate favorable terms with Hawkeye so we don't want it. And they definitely can't get away with saying we don't support it because of the cost since they make billions of dollars in profit. If they accept it on away tours, they would have no justification to refuse it for home tours. They will hide behind platitudes about cricket, machine errors, and other PR statements. I even pointed out that now the players are supportive of DRS so the BCCI will probably end up accepting DRS in the near future.
I broke it down already in my previous posts. But if you want to believe in conspiracy theories about Lbws, then you can join those Pakistanis who believe 9/11 was a CIA conspiracy and that their cricket team only loses if their players fix matches.
@newsjunkie said in Black Caps in India:
Dude you can believe what you want. Hawkeye is the vendor I referred to earlier. Now BCCI is not going to say frankly that hey we were not able to negotiate favorable terms with Hawkeye so we don't want it. And they definitely can't get away with saying we don't support it because of the cost since they make billions of dollars in profit. If they accept it on away tours, they would have no justification to refuse it for home tours. They will hide behind platitudes about cricket, machine errors, and other PR statements. I even pointed out that now the players are supportive of DRS so the BCCI will probably end up accepting DRS in the near future.
I broke it down already in my previous posts. But if you want to believe in conspiracy theories about Lbws, then you can join those Pakistanis who believe 9/11 was a CIA conspiracy and that their cricket team only loses if their players fix matches.
So we've sat through a decade of irrational DRS allocation and legislation all because of a failed vendor/ buyer dispute?
Winger's username already taken huh champ?
-
@newsjunkie Just to clarify something. There is no need at all for BCCI to purchase equipment for DRS. They just need to do as other countries do and pay Hawkeye to set up at tests during the test.
-
@Siam That's a bit one-eyed buddy. Not having DRS works against India as well when it comes to LBWs etc. A few close shouts already in the 2nd innings. Also keep in mind, India played one series (against SL) using DRS and the players were not happy about how the 'umpire's call' worked. Tendulkar and Dhoni were strongly against it. This gave BCCI enough paper cover to justify their dollar-driven decision.
And to address the question of why BCCI is able to reject DRS - the way ICC implemented the rule was that both playing teams have to agree for use of DRS, which BCCI has not. Not defending their stance, just attempting to explain it.
@newsjunkie said in Black Caps in India:
@Siam Also keep in mind, India played one series (against SL) using DRS and the players were not happy about how the 'umpire's call' worked. Tendulkar and Dhoni were strongly against it. This gave BCCI enough paper cover to justify their dollar-driven decision.
They didn't like the fact that when the technology can not produce a conclusive answer it goes back to the umpires call? WTF?
-
Dude you can believe what you want. Hawkeye is the vendor I referred to earlier. Now BCCI is not going to say frankly that hey we were not able to negotiate favorable terms with Hawkeye so we don't want it. And they definitely can't get away with saying we don't support it because of the cost since they make billions of dollars in profit. If they accept it on away tours, they would have no justification to refuse it for home tours. They will hide behind platitudes about cricket, machine errors, and other PR statements. I even pointed out that now the players are supportive of DRS so the BCCI will probably end up accepting DRS in the near future.
I broke it down already in my previous posts. But if you want to believe in conspiracy theories about Lbws, then you can join those Pakistanis who believe 9/11 was a CIA conspiracy and that their cricket team only loses if their players fix matches.
@newsjunkie said in Black Caps in India:
Dude you can believe what you want. Hawkeye is the vendor I referred to earlier. Now BCCI is not going to say frankly that hey we were not able to negotiate favorable terms with Hawkeye so we don't want it. And they definitely can't get away with saying we don't support it because of the cost since they make billions of dollars in profit. If they accept it on away tours, they would have no justification to refuse it for home tours. They will hide behind platitudes about cricket, machine errors, and other PR statements. I even pointed out that now the players are supportive of DRS so the BCCI will probably end up accepting DRS in the near future.
Newsjunkie - do you know whether Hawkeye offers the same (flat rate) terms to all the international boards or, have they recognized that the BCCI is Daddy Warbucks and can afford to pay more so they're aiming to make them pay more?
