Which Hawk-Eye has Daryl Harper been looking at?
'The on-field umpire is in the best position'
Do you currently use Hawk-Eye graphics as part of your preparation process? And do you think umpires have become bolder in giving lbws thanks to exposure to Hawk-Eye graphics?
Bowden: No. It is just a gadget for commentators to use to explain to the viewers what might or could have happened, not what would happen. It's all subjective, and lbws will always be a matter of opinion. One thing that is definite is, there is no doubt the on-field umpire is in the best position and has the best view to make an lbw decision
Only statistics will show if the percentage of lbws given by umpires has increased overall since Hawk-Eye's introduction. One thing is for sure, Hawk-Eye shows a lot more balls hitting the stumps than I believe. This does not really persuade me to give more lbw decisions. It's never been proven that it is 100% accurate. I call it the "Guessereye". Leg-befores will always be open to debate. There is no final outcome or definite conclusion. It's in the opinion of the umpire - who is in the best position, and not Hawk-Eye, to make the final decision. This will always be the case.
Harper: I probably do give more lbws because of Hawk-Eye than I did ten years ago. My personal feeling is that the ball hitting the leg stump a decade back would very rarely be given out lbw because of the feeling that the ball was sliding down leg. But now we've seen so many times from the replays that the ball hits leg stump very often, and we give it not out much more than [the ones hitting] off stump. I've subconsciously made that adjustment.
I wouldn't say I have become bolder, but more accurate. I normally store the Hawk-Eye situation, and use that bank of information along with little details like the bounce, the pitches, and use that to make the right decision in the field.
The scariest thing is that Harper is probably not the worst going around either.
Posted by: Adsy | 05 June 2008 at 14:49
It's absolutely astounding Harper would tailor his decisions to Hawk.
Hawk often shows a swinging/spinning ball would hit leg because it doesn't update quick enough to assess the ball swinging/spinning past leg and instead makes projections based on earlier trajectory.
All too often Hawk has the ball straightening to hit the stumps instead of continuing on its arc and missing the stumps.
Rather than Harper modifying his decision making to suit Hawk, Hawk should be improved to catch the late movement.
I'm still shakin' me 'ead. Surely Harper can see that Hawk is unable to judge late movement. SURELY?!?
Or is it more insidious? Is it a cricket version of political correctness? Does Harper (with or without complicity from the ICC umpiring department) want his decisions rubber-stamped by Hawk, even though Hawk may be wrong?
Posted by: Tony T | 05 June 2008 at 15:22
Hawkeye is at best "an artist's impression" of what might happen, albeit one based on mathematical data and calculations. But it's stil speculative.
As Bart Simpson said to Lisa after she showed him how to use angles to play pool better: "Hey, who would have thought there'd be a practrical use for geometry?"
Posted by: Lad Litter | 05 June 2008 at 17:39
Hawkeye uncut!
Posted by: Adsy | 05 June 2008 at 20:19
I've never seen any of these supposed problems with Hawkeye. Before Hawkeye, I thought that too much was made of "going down leg". There's only a couple of metres between pad and stumps, and the angle is usually small. I'm glad that at least one umpire is giving more LBW's now.
It's interesting that Harper's willing to say so. A couple of years ago, there was a report of an Elite Panel umpire who had started to give more LBW's because of Hawkeye, but he wasn't willing to be named.
Posted by: David Barry | 05 June 2008 at 20:27
That clip is a a pearler, Adsy!
How anyone can stand there with their bare face hanging out and claim that *spit* Hawkeye resembles anything more than a cartoonish Gee Whiz gadget is beyond me.
That a Test umpire even takes any notice of the bloody thing absolutely astounds me.
There are a couple of excellent high tech innovations in TV cricket broadcasts, notably the "hot spot" and the super slow motion, but Hawkeye is a joke, and it defies all the known laws of the universe in its weird ability to have a ball pirouette in mid air.
I recommend that Hawkeye believers spend a few minutes chalking out a full scale crease on the ground, get a bit of string and have a look at some angles off a good length delivery, and see how little variation is needed to miss the stumps.
Better still, stand at bowlers end for a few years and watch a few thousand deliveries and you may get an idea of how a cricket ball behaves.
Posted by: Pedro the Ignorant | 06 June 2008 at 00:12
Oh dear,
I blame the IPL.
I don't know why but why not connect two points of lunacy
Posted by: The Don has risen | 06 June 2008 at 12:06
Harper's problem has always been giving batsmen out to balls pitching outside leg. Which might be why he rarely seems to stand in 'big' games.
Posted by: SaggyGreen | 06 June 2008 at 18:53
In the interests of self promotion and learning how to embed Youtube, may I present all the things: that I hate?
Posted by: pat | 07 June 2008 at 01:46
It's quiet here this weekend.
Must have all gone to the snow ;-)
Posted by: Bruce | 08 June 2008 at 14:38
Never mind Harper - the other Daryl's been doing a spiffing job for us at Trent Bridge!
Posted by: Can Bass 1 | 08 June 2008 at 17:08