Ye I tend to agree with you to be honest Paul… It would be much “easier” to attribute errors in the shorter format simply due to the fewer number of permutations available rather than a multi-innings game.

It would also make for an interesting time at IPL auction time when team owners would have a clear idea as to what type of fielding player they can get… It might (although probably won’t) make the difference between picking one player over another, and might even add some value to players – giving them a different dynamic.

I totally agree with you there Al, you make some great points about how tough it would be to apply.

Cricket is more dynamic and has a much wider range of fielding positions than in baseball across an entire oval. The different fielding positions are so varied too… It would be hard to compare a dropped catch at silly short leg with one out on the cover boundary, just as much as slip is almost a specialist fielding position.

I get what you are saying with the gun fielders and how its going to be harder to quantify whether there is a missed opportunity in terms of runs… perhaps errors in terms of missed runs will be too difficult in that sense. The way sabermetrics has attempted to get around the dilemma of different fielders being better is the Ultimate Zone Rating – whereby a calculation is made in relation to how many balls they allow to get through “their zone”. This would obviously be difficult – or more difficult in cricket because fielders don’t have defined positions as they do in baseball and it can vary ball to ball… Much more difficult to attribute an average rating.

Perhaps the only way you could attribute errors would be for dropped catches at risk of it becoming too complicated – and leave the rest to crickets own sabermetricians (if there are such a thing!)

Ye it was a funny old game… Lol. Sorry about that – must have confused myself when writing that part. It was, of course the score when Waugh came into bat… My bad.

Ironman Triathletes take some beating…

The World Ironman Championships in Kona were the result of some similar banter between cyclists, runners and swimmers to discover who was fitter. So they combined three existing endurance events, the Waikiki Roughwater Swim (2.4 mi./3.86 km), the Around-Oahu Bike Race (115 mi./185.07 km, and the Honolulu Marathon to create an Ironman Triathlon.

The argument I’d make for Ironman Triathletes is that the transition between swimming (an mostly anaerobic exercise) to cycling and then running punishes the body like no other. These guys need the strength to be able to swim 3.9km in the ocean and then the endurance to cycle and run. These guys and girls complete a cycling race equivalent to a typical Tour de France stage after having swum for the best part of an hour through rough water, and follow it up with a marathon. Extraordinary. Just the training required to reach a high level in all three sports is unbelievably punishing.

Mirinda Carfrae has been a champion for Australia up until this year when she pulled out after succumbing to injuries suffered after being hit by a car while training… She holds the women’s course record around Kona at 8 hrs 52 mins 14 sec, and also has the fastest marathon time of 2 hrs 50 mins 26 sec. Aussie Craig Alexander holds men’s course record, 8 hrs 3 mins 56 sec. These two should certainly be mentioned in the conversation.

To throw a spanner into my own argument though – I’ve always considered recovery to be the truest test of fitness. This would suggest that Grand Tour cyclists are the champions because they can and do keep going for an entire three weeks of competition.

I guess that’s the thing isnt it kick to kick. Arrieta looked to be tiring a bit towards the middle of the game… It looked like they had subbed him out at one point on the internet coverage but that might have been me missing something. His 5th complete game of the year – thats pretty impressive in itself. I hope the rest of the Cubs pitchers do him justice in the Divisional.

You’re right – it’s a strange scenario that the system has thrown up this year. I would have thought that seeding the teams straight away in the Divisional Series (as is done in the Championship Series) would have been better. At least that way the better two teams in the National League will be playing off for the pennant…

Cubs still in control at the moment (4-0 top f the 8th), but Arrieta was starting to allow a few hits so they’ve just subbed him out with Soria… Pirates need to strike now if they are to have a chance.

Good point about the touchies kaiviti. Especially as most (all?) of them are fairly high standard referees at this World Cup. You’d have thought they’d be able to bring their experience to play. Lots to keep an eye on though, so much can be missed.

And you’re right about Peyper and Fiji. Everyone, including England looked nervous. And that’s justifiable. It was the World Cup Opener after all. Nowhere to hide… In that sence it’s understandable as to why Peyper lost his bottle a bit. A lot of the players were guilty too, but as a collective they can sometimes hide those nerves. The ref is kinda isolated…

Ye that sounds reasonable. And how long does it take to get a tee onto the field anyhow… 40 in total. Keeps the backroom staff on their toes.

I can see that PeterK, that why the best referees work in tandem with their touch judges. One looks for grounding, one looks for the touchline. Very hard, but that’s what they are paid (sometimes) to do…

What would the reception be to having another official in the in-goal? His job could be to look solely for grounding. Might end up looking like a game of NFL but more decisions could be made on the spot?

Well said Ralph, it’s a blight that affects every sport that I know. Officials are so regularly berated that it has almost become a part of the culture of going to sport.

Ye I wasn’t really sure of the protocol there – I was all ready to blow up about how unfair it was that the try had been given when he chalked it off and went upstairs. Still felt a little uneasy though. Don’t get me wrong, I was glad the right decision was upheld, and it gave us a perfect opportunity to view the brilliant tackle and tapping of the elbow by the England defender (Brown???) in slow motion, but once the try had been given – I would have thought you had to keep that decision.

“Life and sport are a series of contentious decisions.”

That is an absolutely perfect way to describe why referees and their interpretations are so important.

Couldn’t agree more. That’s part of the appeal of sport isn’t it? I remember a friend once moaning to me after a game how terrible the referee was today and how its always like this, and I asked him what we’d talk about on the way home of the ref did everything right. He was stumped…

Of course the great skill of the players etc, but the referee is such an important focal point, as the figure of authority (boss if you like) is in life.

If we do go to the extreme NFL approach we loose a significant part of what makes rugby, rugby. Interpretation of the rules makes up such an important part of how the game is played. Remove that and it becomes a formulaic series of plays not unlike what the NFL evolved into.

This was a great comment, thanks.

I certainly agree with you on the point that sometimes one replay would do. The Nikola Matawalu try vs England was a case in point. You could tell after the first replay it was no try. Unlucky, but move on. Unfortunately we had to look for another 3 angles (all worse) to show what we had already seen. It was maddening.

Speeding up the other areas would be awesome too. There is a rule in water polo whereby if a foul is given and the player it is given to swims away from the ball, the foul is instantly reversed. Would be impossible in rugby, but in football it should work like that. I hate seeing players win a free kick or throw in, pick up the ball and then drop it so someone else can take it.

30 seconds is pretty short for a kick – 45 would be fine. I wonder how often the one minute rule is rigidly applied… I’ll keep an eye open for it. 40 seconds is long enough in American Football to get a kicking team out onto the field and for an attempt to be made – should be much faster in rugby.

This is particularly a problem in lower level English football Sean. The referee’s appear to tell the linesmen that they are not there to help him other than to call offsides and point the way he tells them. It gets very frustrating seeing linesmen pointedly watch the action, see the ball go out and then watch the referee to point at which direction he thinks the throw in should go – sometimes even changing his decision to match the referee despite knowing he is right and what he saw is right.

I fear the touch judges will go the same way in both rugby codes. But that dies raise the question as to their purpose in the first place. They would be the first to go I’d have thought…

Thanks wardad, I appreciate that. And agree, the TMO has just slowed everything down. I’d rather refs felt they could make a tough call when required rather than give everyone a break while it is checked from 1000 angles…

Cheers Kia,

I do agree with the big screen somehow taking something away from the experience of watching the game live. In England it’s less of a problem as much fewer of the games are played at grounds with big screens anyway, particularly football so you definitely had to pay attention all the time! Would be useful on occasion though, I remember going to see a cricket game with my Grandmother once and she somehow managed to miss all but one of the 19 wickets that fell on the day…

I definitely get your point over the replays to assist the home team. I seem to remember that Tottenham got into hot water once by showing a contentious decision repeatedly in an EPL match at White Hart Lane (one of the few English football grounds with video screens built in)…

And valid point about Richie 😉

Sorry At work, I just wanted to keep the phrase the same for everything incase of confusion – which I now see it has caused anyway…

Not referring to the TMO as Television Match Official was an oversight on my part Ben so apologies for that too.

Ye I definitely get your point. And yes, the “reward” for foul play at the moment does not match the risk it entails (i.e. 3 points as opposed to 5/7 is not enough of a deterrent). The only drama is referees being given too much power to influence the game based on a 50:50 call.

I wouldn’t have thought I would have been the only one to be frustrated by the lack of this rule being utilised by the referees.

http://www.independent.ie/sport/gaelic-games/hurling/the-great-debate-is-it-time-for-hurling-to-introduce-the-black-card-for-cynical-fouls-31467170.html

An interesting two view points on whether the black card should be introduced in hurling – parallels with whether it would be suitable in other sports as well…

I particularly like the statement “it came about after years of unrest with some unsavoury aspects of play emerged that the rule book simply wasn’t equipped to cope with”, which when the rules in union are being played with as in the NRC, loopholes can be created and the possibility for these new cards can be created… Just my opinion.

Couldn’t agree more – you’re absolutely right. Doesn’t matter if it’s the 1st minute or the 79th minute, the rules are the rules. Happens in the Northern Hemisphere too, you see warnings given for offences that are blatant yellow cards and then later on, yellow cards for the same offence. Consistency is the key to anything. You’re right, they’ll soon learn (you’d hope…)

That could easily work Rob – and would discourage blatant cheating at the very least (you’d hope) while attempting to preserve the contest.

Ye I know what you are saying 30mm tags. The DJ seemed very over the top and was widely under appreciated by everyone around me at both the games I have seen this season. At best they ignored it, and most simply shook their heads and engaged their mates in conversation (loudly so they could hear themselves over the noise…)

I also love the new rules – or at least appreciate the effort to make a difference and change things – and I think they did well to do so and have made a change to the effect that they play some wonderful attacking rugby under them.

Thats a really good point Bakkies, I hadn’t thought about that. It does limit the effectiveness purely from a safety point of view… I can’t even begin to think of a way around that unless a team is made to sacrifice a back in that situation just as if a front row player was in the sin bin for a scrum.

And yes it was hurling where I’ve heard it mentioned that they don’t use it much/if at all. In fact I’m not sure they have yet – despite there being plenty of occasions where it could/should have been used.

Inept officiating is a plague that affects every sport moa. Inconsistency is the biggest crime for me…