Tendulkar 'changed his mind' over Hawk-Eye

Tendulkar 'changed his mind' over Hawk-Eye

Post by Brian Lawrenc » Mon, 25 Jul 2011 18:38:21


Brief article in today's Mail on Sunday (Daily Mail) says that during his
pre-tour stay in London Sachin had discussions with Paul Hawkins. Hawkins
is quoted as saying, "The problem has been that the BCCI have made decisions
without knowing the facts. It was clear Tendulkar had been told the Hawk-Eye
system was manual, requiring an operator. He wasn't aware it is automatic
and beyond corruption by humans. Once we had set the record straight with
him, he left saying he would tell the BCCI and recommend Hawk-Eye was used.
I don't think it will take too much time for the BCCI to act on advice
from Tendulkar."


 
 
 

Tendulkar 'changed his mind' over Hawk-Eye

Post by Brian Lawrenc » Mon, 25 Jul 2011 18:47:08

Quote:

> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/cricket/article-2017960/Sachin-tell-...


 
 
 

Tendulkar 'changed his mind' over Hawk-Eye

Post by alve » Mon, 25 Jul 2011 19:22:38

Quote:


>> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/cricket/article-2017960/Sachin-tell-...

So, if Hawkins is to be believed, then does this mean that there's only two
options:

1. The BCCI don't know how HE works and have based their opposition to it
on ignorance.
2. The BCCI knew how HE worked but lied to their players about it.

alvey

 
 
 

Tendulkar 'changed his mind' over Hawk-Eye

Post by Ravi » Mon, 25 Jul 2011 19:02:40


Quote:
> Brief article in today's Mail on Sunday (Daily Mail) says that during his
> pre-tour stay in London Sachin had discussions with Paul Hawkins. Hawkins
> is quoted as saying, "The problem has been that the BCCI have made decisions
> without knowing the facts. It was clear Tendulkar had been told the Hawk-Eye
> system was manual, requiring an operator. He wasn't aware it is automatic
> and beyond corruption by humans. Once we had set the record straight with
> him, he left saying he would tell the BCCI and recommend Hawk-Eye was used.
> I don't think it will take too much time for the BCCI to act on advice
> from Tendulkar."



Next Steps:
SRT to communicate his findings to the BCCI.
BCCI to review and change their minds (or not).
BCCI to discuss with the Indian team & captain - they can change their
mind (or not)

I find it hard to believe that the BCCI would not have checked this
point out earlier!

 
 
 

Tendulkar 'changed his mind' over Hawk-Eye

Post by jzfredrick » Mon, 25 Jul 2011 19:43:17


Quote:


>>> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/cricket/article-2017960/Sachin-tell-...

> So, if Hawkins is to be believed, then does this mean that there's only two
> options:

> 1. The BCCI don't know how HE works and have based their opposition to it
> on ignorance.
> 2. The BCCI knew how HE worked but lied to their players about it.

3. HawkEye's own "accuracy and believability" document says the HawkEye
operators;

"b. manually fine tune the point on the trajectory where interception with
the batsman was made. Automatically the system is only able to
determine the interception point to the nearest frame of Hawk-Eye
video running at 106 frames per second. This can be improved
manually and is the only way to ensure that the interception point is
accurate to 5m"

By the way, based on this it looks like we can stop pretending that the
MCC's "2.6mm" is the documented margin of error.

 
 
 

Tendulkar 'changed his mind' over Hawk-Eye

Post by alve » Mon, 25 Jul 2011 20:08:27

Quote:

> By the way, based on this it looks like we can stop pretending that the
> MCC's "2.6mm" is the documented margin of error.

Or "we" could pretend that you don't exist. This is becoming an attractive
option.

as

 
 
 

Tendulkar 'changed his mind' over Hawk-Eye

Post by DingDon » Mon, 25 Jul 2011 20:15:11

correct me if i am wrong but hawk eye does need a human operator for
determining the interception point. i think the hawk eye ceo
apologised for a marcus north during the ashes lbw which used an
incorrect interception point.
 
 
 

Tendulkar 'changed his mind' over Hawk-Eye

Post by jzfredrick » Mon, 25 Jul 2011 20:19:49


Quote:
> correct me if i am wrong but hawk eye does need a human operator for
> determining the interception point. i think the hawk eye ceo
> apologised for a marcus north during the ashes lbw which used an
> incorrect interception point.

I don't think it NEEDS one - they just use it to tweak it (hopefully for
the better)
 
 
 

Tendulkar 'changed his mind' over Hawk-Eye

Post by DingDon » Mon, 25 Jul 2011 20:17:09


Quote:
> correct me if i am wrong but hawk eye does need a human operator for
> determining the interception point. i think the hawk eye ceo
> apologised for a marcus north during the ashes lbw which used an
> incorrect interception point.

apologies, it is infact virtual-eye (the tracking system that was used
during the ashes) that made the mistake.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/cricket/international/theashes/81902...

 
 
 

Tendulkar 'changed his mind' over Hawk-Eye

Post by FBInCIAnNSATerroristSlaye » Tue, 26 Jul 2011 03:26:36


Quote:


>>> http://SportToday.org/

> So, if Hawkins is to be believed, then does this mean that there's only
> two
> options:

> 1. The BCCI don't know how HE works and have based their opposition to it
> on ignorance.
> 2. The BCCI knew how HE worked but lied to their players about it.

> alvey

Yes.......BCCI LIED and You can GO *** YOURSELF..........
 
 
 

Tendulkar 'changed his mind' over Hawk-Eye

Post by John Hal » Tue, 26 Jul 2011 04:07:24


Quote:

>3. HawkEye's own "accuracy and believability" document says the
>HawkEye operators;

>"b. manually fine tune the point on the trajectory where interception with
>the batsman was made. Automatically the system is only able to
>determine the interception point to the nearest frame of Hawk-Eye
>video running at 106 frames per second. This can be improved
>manually and is the only way to ensure that the interception point
>is
>accurate to 5m"

>By the way, based on this it looks like we can stop pretending that
>the MCC's "2.6mm" is the documented margin of error.

I assume that "accurate to 5m" must be a typo and should read 5 mm.
--
John Hall
            "Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick
             themselves up and hurry off as if nothing ever happened."
                                            Winston S Churchill (1874-1965)
 
 
 

Tendulkar 'changed his mind' over Hawk-Eye

Post by Andrew Dunfor » Tue, 26 Jul 2011 08:52:20


Quote:
> Brief article in today's Mail on Sunday (Daily Mail) says that during his
> pre-tour stay in London Sachin had discussions with Paul Hawkins. Hawkins
> is quoted as saying, "The problem has been that the BCCI have made
> decisions
> without knowing the facts. It was clear Tendulkar had been told the
> Hawk-Eye
> system was manual, requiring an operator. He wasn't aware it is automatic
> and beyond corruption by humans. Once we had set the record straight with
> him, he left saying he would tell the BCCI and recommend Hawk-Eye was
> used.
> I don't think it will take too much time for the BCCI to act on advice
> from Tendulkar."

By any chance did Paul Hawkins also say "and I'm a massive spin doctor"?

Andrew

 
 
 

Tendulkar 'changed his mind' over Hawk-Eye

Post by Andrew Dunfor » Tue, 26 Jul 2011 09:00:08


Quote:



>>>> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/cricket/article-2017960/Sachin-tell-...

>> So, if Hawkins is to be believed, then does this mean that there's only
>> two
>> options:

>> 1. The BCCI don't know how HE works and have based their opposition to it
>> on ignorance.
>> 2. The BCCI knew how HE worked but lied to their players about it.

> 3. HawkEye's own "accuracy and believability" document says the HawkEye
> operators;

> "b. manually fine tune the point on the trajectory where interception with
> the batsman was made. Automatically the system is only able to
> determine the interception point to the nearest frame of Hawk-Eye
> video running at 106 frames per second. This can be improved
> manually and is the only way to ensure that the interception point is
> accurate to 5m"

> By the way, based on this it looks like we can stop pretending that the
> MCC's "2.6mm" is the documented margin of error.

The most relevant point about the Daily Mail article is that the only quote
attributed to Tendulkar is something he said a month or more ago in a
different context.  I for one shall be ignoring this article as Hawkins
spin.

Andrew

 
 
 

Tendulkar 'changed his mind' over Hawk-Eye

Post by jzfredrick » Tue, 26 Jul 2011 09:19:09


Quote:
>> 3. HawkEye's own "accuracy and believability" document says the
>> HawkEye operators;

>> "b. manually fine tune the point on the trajectory where interception
>> with
>> the batsman was made. Automatically the system is only able to
>> determine the interception point to the nearest frame of Hawk-Eye
>> video running at 106 frames per second. This can be improved
>> manually and is the only way to ensure that the interception point is
>> accurate to 5m"

>> By the way, based on this it looks like we can stop pretending that
>> the MCC's "2.6mm" is the documented margin of error.

> The most relevant point about the Daily Mail article is that the only
> quote attributed to Tendulkar is something he said a month or more ago
> in a different context. I for one shall be ignoring this article as
> Hawkins spin.

I'll be joining you.

The scary thought is the BCCI would makes its mind up based on input
from players...

On the whole HawkEye thing, Haroon Lorgat said the other say that
"independant testing was underway". Hopefully we'll get some results
soon. Perhaps SRT has some insider knowledge about results to date? (and
that those results are promising)

 
 
 

Tendulkar 'changed his mind' over Hawk-Eye

Post by jzfredrick » Tue, 26 Jul 2011 09:41:38


Quote:


>> 3. HawkEye's own "accuracy and believability" document says the
>> HawkEye operators;

>> "b. manually fine tune the point on the trajectory where interception with
>> the batsman was made. Automatically the system is only able to
>> determine the interception point to the nearest frame of Hawk-Eye
>> video running at 106 frames per second. This can be improved
>> manually and is the only way to ensure that the interception point
>> is
>> accurate to 5m"

>> By the way, based on this it looks like we can stop pretending that
>> the MCC's "2.6mm" is the documented margin of error.

> I assume that "accurate to 5m" must be a typo and should read 5 mm.

Opps, yeah. Must've been a copy and paste error.

I don't look forward to accusations of me of putting words in people's
mouths...