Facts concerning BLIC

[brad352]

If it is included, it would tell if the ball will hit the wicket or not in an LBW situation or atleast thats what its meant for. Now it is to do the thing as I mention, then I can't understand any reason as to how it wouldn't have any impact on dicission. That is because at some pointHawk-Eye would have been scripted with Respect to the dicission, if it suggests the umpire would give it out, you may see that ball is going to hit the stumps. I dont think you'll find that the umpire gave out and hawk-eye showed it wasn't going to hit the stumps. What Im saying is that, like cricket 2002 where the umpire judged the LBWs wrong so many times.I would say there, the hawk-eye should be usefull as to tell if that was an LBW or not, and if it was, the umpire got it wrong. This whole thing can also be refeered as a new feature. Like whenyou are given out LBW and the Hawk-Eye showed it wasn't out and then you get some interesting comments from the commentary team. This DOES happen in real cricket so why not in game.

The CPU will go through some process to decide if the LBW will be given or not, same as every other cricket game- there's no reason to believe that Hawkeye will be anymore accurate than this, as it is only scripted to track the trajectory of the ball, just as previous versions were scripted to make a judgement whether or not an LBW was out.

 

[fardin]

The CPU will go through some process to decide if the LBW will be given or not, same as every other cricket game- there's no reason to believe that Hawkeye will be anymore accurate than this, as it is only scripted to track the trajectory of the ball, just as previous versions were scripted to make a judgement whether or not an LBW was out.

So What is new about hawkeye That we are getting so exited about?

 

[fanirama]

Sarwan
I've given you some positive reputation ( for courageously speaking your mind out )
However, I see you still have a long way to go

Don't worry though. These reps mean nothing anyways :cool:

 

[sami ullah khan]

can somebody tell how accurate the palyer models will be. it should be better than cricket 2004 where every other player had youhannas face on. in this regard the screenshots i have seen are inconclusive. hope they work on this in BLIC.

 

[sachin]

@sachin: He bet them all on the SA vs WI Test, same as I did[/QUOTE]
Ditto.I've gon into red now!

 

[brad352]

@sachin: He bet them all on the SA vs WI Test, same as I did

Ditto.I've gon into red now! [/QUOTE]
Bets have all been removed from your reputation, that'd be why

 

[themuel1]

Fact of the Day

There are no facts of the dayfor the next few day's as Rubbergenius is away. Then, once Rubbergenius is on his honeymoon, there will be no further facts of the day for a further another 3 weeks.

 

[Skater]

Fact of the Day

There are no facts of the dayfor the next few day's as Rubbergenius is away. Then, once Rubbergenius is on his honeymoon, there will be no further facts of the day for a further another 3 weeks.

That's fine, I could live with that.

 

[sunil ojha]

That's fine, I could live with that.

Thank God. I was worrying about you.

 

[durrani1]

Facts about LBW and howkeye does'nt matter now as there is no manual appealing.

 

[sachin]

Happy honeymoon!

 

[kmk1284]

then buy cric 2005 there is manual appealing but prob is there is no hawkeye

 

[jdbais]

Facts about LBW and howkeye does'nt matter now as there is no manual appealing.

What does that mean?

 

[Stephen Bailey]

What does that mean?

He thinks that just because there is no manual appealing, we don't need to know anymore about Hawk-eye and anything else to do with LBW's.

 

[jdbais]

Lol. How is hawkeye linked with manual appealing? Do you bowl the ball, see through hawkeye that the ball has pitched in line and is going to hit the stumps, and then decide to manually appeal.