H1017412 wrote:
iamsam wrote:
The benefit of technology, hey? Glad they made it standard procedure to check for no ball.
For sure bro, I've (as have a lot of people) been baying for the use of technology in cricket... and in sport in general really. From my point of view, if the game is going to be played properly - the mm count, there's no way to judge that other than by technology.
It'd be great to see how many of the historic results might have differed, had they this technology.
Oh my soul, yes!!! I suspect quite a few Ashes would have had different outcomes ...
And let's be honest, without Technology the Springboks would probably not have been 2007 champs either ... OFF TOPIC!!!!!!
Back to cricket: technology gave the best agme ever, better equipment (Helmets, visors, balls, bats, etc.) it gave us live viewing and now even HD, so why not amend the "rules" to stay in line with other advances.
Just one thing, though. The review process must be addressed. Too many times it happens that the 3rd umpire (rugby or cricket, or any other sport for that matter) takes ages to look, re-look, re-look again, and then do the same from seven different angles, before he finally agrees with the initail call.

This takes away the advantage of the advancing team, or in the case of cricket the team with their tails up. It dampens the mood and allows for adrenaline levels to return to "normal" which IMHO takes away a lot of the edge of competition.
I think with regards to LBW decisions they've got it down fairly well: pitch in line, yes/no, height ?, hit in line yes/no. Yes to all three - you're out, doubt - benefit goes to the batsmen. Quick and easy.
Do the same for the other aspects and indeed in other sports as well.