Harish's World - neither here nor there...

First Test, India vs. West Indies, Antigua, West Indian First Innings - Brian Charles Lara got out to a rash stroke wide outside the off stump. Indian second Innings - Mohammed to Dhoni, as usual Dhoni slogs, Ganga takes a catch at (or on) the boundary line, referred to the 3rd Umpire, about 15 minutes wasted and no decision made. Lara gets agitated, speaks to the umpires, snatches the ball from Umpire Asad Rauf and gives it to Mohammed. There's mayhem. Dhoni walks off, Innings is then declared. After this Lara played 3 innings so far in the series. In all 3 innings he has been (given?) out LBW. On all 3 occasions the umpire was Asad Rauf. Is it just a coincidence??

The First decision, the day after the brawl, Sreesanth to Lara, Ball pitches marginally on leg stump, straightens. Lara tries his back foot flick with his characteristic jump, misses, ball hits him just above the knee roll (as usual Lara is standing outside the batting crease), the players claim. No decision from Asad Rauf, dejectedly Sreesanth turns to walk towards his run up. To everyone's surprise the umpire raises his finger.

The next one, Second Test, First Innings. Kumble to Lara. Kumble bowling over the wicket. Ball pitches on off stump and straightens a bit. Lara stretches full forward, back leg on the batting crease, the bat next to the pad and the ball hits the pad. Everyone claims (including the fielder at backward point, don't know how he can judge these balls). Almost immediately the umpire's finger is up.

The third and the most disgusting decision, Second test, Second Innings, Lara playing his heart out with an uncharacteristic slow game to save the match. Sehwag to Lara. Sehwag bowling around the wicket, ball pitches outside off stump, and turns slightly away from the batsman. Lara tries his flick through mid-wicket. Slightly forward with his front leg outside off stump, misses the ball as it hits his front pad. (One of the basic rules of LBW is that if the ball hits the batsman outside off stump and he is playing a stroke, he is not out). Even as Sehwag turns around to start appealing, the finger of the umpire goes up.

There are many who argue that the first two decisions are right, and the basis of their argument being that hawk eye shows that the ball just clips the bails and just clips the off stump respectively. Aaah... Hawk Eye... let me turn my attention to hawk eye and logically try to work out the way it functions. So what is hawk eye? It is just a software that is used to predict the projectile of the ball that is being bowled. So how does it work? Let us divide the software into a set of modules for taking input, then predicting the course fo the ball and then displaying it.

Let us concentrate on the predicting module. The input to this module will be the set of points in the 3D co-ordinate system representing the projectile of the ball from the time it has been delivered to the time it hits the pads of the batsman. Output should be the set of points that continues from the point of impact of the pad till the curve intersects the vertical plane drawn at the stumps. Ideally, we can consider only the part of the projectile from the time it pitches to the time it hits the pads. Based on the horizontal and vertical distance it travels in the given time, the velocity can be found out and the projectile predicted. This is one way of going about the algorithm for it.

Having a tiny bit of knowledge in programming and Computer graphics myself, this idea stuck me while watching the match. The so called decisions that are argued about are the close ones. Now how difficult will it be to input another argument which is the point where you want the ball to be in the plane of the stumps and making the curve reach that point. Now the difference between this curve and the normally generated curve will be very negligible and cannot by found out the naked eye (i.e. the viewers) if this end point is very close to the original end point, actually so close that one misses the stumps and the other just brushes it. This cannot be differentiated as long as the distance between the end points is exaggerated.

Now how did I come to a conclusion that this might be happening? Well, while watching the matches, similar balls for the Indian batsmen and other batsmen are shown such that for the former the ball always manages to miss the stumps while for the latter it always manages to find the way to the stumps (at least to have a feather touch to the stumps).

The press doesn't make it easy either. I read about how when India is bowling many close decisions are not given, and how whatever decisions are given are always out, while when the Indians are batting, there is not a mention of a single decision which has been given not out even though they were as plumb as it gets (at least compared to the ones given while they bowl).

Guess I am moving from one topic to another a little too much. So what is the point that I am trying to make. Well it is as simple as that the umpiring standards have become pathetic. The so called Elite Panel has may be just a couple of umpires who are fair (or good). The rest, I have no idea whether they are bad or biased. It is always like they make decisions that generally favor the more supposedly stronger (actually popular) side. To think of it, the side actually becomes strong by winning and these decisions help them in winning, which implies the umpires help in winning. This reverse argument tends to the fact that the umpires may be biased. Only they know the truth.

Another point I am trying to make is how dumb people can get by simple believing everything they see and read and arguing blindly about it saying that it is the absolute truth. Anything and everything in this world is corrupt. (Too bad they do not have CRC error codes associated with it). When encountering such arguments it's always better to ignore them and follow this old saying never argue with idiots, they will get you down to their level and beat you with experience.