Video analysis of line decisions have been used by tennis and rugby officials for years, but cricket has many more high-tech options that could be used, if the game’s authorities allowed it.
A pitch from a 150 kph fast pitcher takes only a third of a second to reach the batter. Therefore, umpires must be very skilled at judging the length and line of the ball to make a correct lbw decision. Experience and skill are invaluable here, but it can still be a tough call, especially since the referee doesn’t see replays.
However, televised coverage of live cricket has an arsenal of high-tech devices that could help the umpire, including the Hawk-eye system. Hawk-eye uses 6 cameras placed around the ground to track the flight of the ball, then a computer instantly converts their images into a 3D image of the ball’s flight. You can follow the swing, spin, and seam, and predict whether the ball would have hit the wicket after hitting the batsman’s pad. This gives the TV commentator and viewer an unfair advantage over the referee when judging a lbw. But does this undermine a referee’s decision that is based on experience that even a computer cannot match? Even Hawk-eye finds it difficult to predict the bounce of a cricket ball, so it may not always be correct. So should referees have access to Hawk-eye replays? What do you think? Many more high-tech options present the same dilemma.
Apart from this great debate, Hawk-eye has also brought benefits to cricket coaches. You can record exactly where the ball lands, so you can give players feedback on your accuracy. It also measures the speed of the ball, showing how much time a batsman has to react. Due to these benefits, the system was installed at the ECB Academy in Loughborough, to help analyze batting and bowling techniques.
Stump cameras and stump microphones have been a part of televised coverage of live cricket since the early 1990s. In the mid-1990s the “snickometer” was devised to use the sounds picked up by the microphone on end. The sharp sound of a ball hitting the rim of a bat is clearly displayed on a sound level graph. When combined with slow-motion video, this can clearly show whether the ball came close to the goalie or hit the bat before hitting a bag.
The super slow motion camera takes around 500 frames per second (fps), compared to 24fps at normal speed. Used since 2005, this is a great tool for analyzing runs and stumps, and referee they can Check out these images to help you with your decisions. But, it’s also good to see whether or not the ball deflected off the bat, even if the umpire It is not get this information. Do you think I should?
The latest technology in the commentator’s arsenal is the “hot spot.” This detects whether the ball has connected with a player’s bat, bag, glove or ground, using two infrared cameras. These detect the small amount of heat generated by friction created when two objects collide, such as a ball, bat, pad, glove, or the ground. This can show if the ball hit the bat for a catch or hit the bat before the bag to determine a lbw layoff.
The “hot spot” was first used for live cricket coverage by Channel 9 in Australia in 2006. As with the snickometer, the umpire does not see his evidence before making a decision.
Eminent commentators and cricketers are divided on whether the technology should replace the umpire’s judgment for dubious decisions. The view on one side is that referees are a traditional part of the game and can exercise judgment that technology cannot. The other party believes that it is more important to ensure that the decisions of the referees are correct.
There is even an element of history that repeats itself: the laws of the game were formalized in 1744, in response to increased betting on the results of matches. So will the technology fill the same need versus internet gambling?
High-tech decision aids have only been available for about 15 years and are getting better all the time, so the pressure on traditional arbitration can only increase. It’s a big debate for cricket authorities and cricket fans. What do you think?