Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Domains

Domain: lords.org

Stories and comments across the archive that link to lords.org.

Comments · 9

  1. NZ Law based on baseball rules? surely cricket! by fantomas · · Score: 4, Insightful · on NZL Govt Rushes Thru Controversial Anti-Piracy Law

    This "three strikes and you're out" infantile framing of legislation drives me crazy. Since when have the laws of baseball (or any game) been considered a sensible foundation for a nation's legislation?

    Seems to me too simplistic to base a country's law on sound bites like "three strikes and you're out".

    Anyhow, if we're going for games-based legal systems, surely New Zealand should go for laws based on cricket (or rugby)? How about a financial services industry law based on LBW (leg before wicket)?

  2. Ahem. Cricket has Laws, not Rules by The+Grassy+Knoll · · Score: 1 · on Australia Cracked US Combat Aircraft Codes

    Given here.

  3. Re:copyright by AndrewRUK · · Score: 1 · on Zimmermann Enters Debate on Microsoft Encryption
    MCC
    What does the Marylebone Cricket Club have to do with it? :-)
  4. Re:It's all in the perspective by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0 · on The New Yorker on Business Process Patents

    Patents are as American as Apple Pie and Baseball as far as I'm concerned.

    Actually, patents are as British as spotted dick and cricket. ;)

    I'm an American too, but you have to lay credit (or blame) where it is due.

  5. Re:A similar technique has been used for cricket by scrutty · · Score: 1 · on Digital Baseball Umpires
    No, your link is to the third umpire, which actually is another umpire, who has access to a video replay. Their input on a decision is only allowed when called for by the match umpire, and only for a limited set of conditions.

    The article you link is commenting on an occasion when an experimental wider set of decisions were allowed for referral. As far as I know ( I'm a cricket follower, but not a fanatic ), the referrable decisions are still limited to run outs, , stumpings , boundary decisions and close catches Furthermore, they are only allowed to review the video replay a limited number of times.

    What you may be thinking of instead, is the extremely cool hawkeye system which is used by the channel4 TV station , who show the bulk of the UK cricket coverage, to predict the flight a ball subjected to an LBW decision would have taken. Its a brilliant TV aid, and extremely sophisticated technology, but its only used by commentators, and has nothing to do with the umpires. I doubt it would ever find its way into cricket in any official capacity

    Cricket is a way cool game, and extremely nerdy. You have to admire any sport where a satisfying match can go on for a week and then end in a draw.

  6. Re:A similar technique has been used for cricket by scrutty · · Score: 1 · on Digital Baseball Umpires
    No, your link is to the third umpire, which actually is another umpire, who has access to a video replay. Their input on a decision is only allowed when called for by the match umpire, and only for a limited set of conditions.

    The article you link is commenting on an occasion when an experimental wider set of decisions were allowed for referral. As far as I know ( I'm a cricket follower, but not a fanatic ), the referrable decisions are still limited to run outs, , stumpings , boundary decisions and close catches Furthermore, they are only allowed to review the video replay a limited number of times.

    What you may be thinking of instead, is the extremely cool hawkeye system which is used by the channel4 TV station , who show the bulk of the UK cricket coverage, to predict the flight a ball subjected to an LBW decision would have taken. Its a brilliant TV aid, and extremely sophisticated technology, but its only used by commentators, and has nothing to do with the umpires. I doubt it would ever find its way into cricket in any official capacity

    Cricket is a way cool game, and extremely nerdy. You have to admire any sport where a satisfying match can go on for a week and then end in a draw.

  7. Re:A similar technique has been used for cricket by scrutty · · Score: 1 · on Digital Baseball Umpires
    No, your link is to the third umpire, which actually is another umpire, who has access to a video replay. Their input on a decision is only allowed when called for by the match umpire, and only for a limited set of conditions.

    The article you link is commenting on an occasion when an experimental wider set of decisions were allowed for referral. As far as I know ( I'm a cricket follower, but not a fanatic ), the referrable decisions are still limited to run outs, , stumpings , boundary decisions and close catches Furthermore, they are only allowed to review the video replay a limited number of times.

    What you may be thinking of instead, is the extremely cool hawkeye system which is used by the channel4 TV station , who show the bulk of the UK cricket coverage, to predict the flight a ball subjected to an LBW decision would have taken. Its a brilliant TV aid, and extremely sophisticated technology, but its only used by commentators, and has nothing to do with the umpires. I doubt it would ever find its way into cricket in any official capacity

    Cricket is a way cool game, and extremely nerdy. You have to admire any sport where a satisfying match can go on for a week and then end in a draw.

  8. Re:A similar technique has been used for cricket by scrutty · · Score: 1 · on Digital Baseball Umpires
    No, your link is to the third umpire, which actually is another umpire, who has access to a video replay. Their input on a decision is only allowed when called for by the match umpire, and only for a limited set of conditions.

    The article you link is commenting on an occasion when an experimental wider set of decisions were allowed for referral. As far as I know ( I'm a cricket follower, but not a fanatic ), the referrable decisions are still limited to run outs, , stumpings , boundary decisions and close catches Furthermore, they are only allowed to review the video replay a limited number of times.

    What you may be thinking of instead, is the extremely cool hawkeye system which is used by the channel4 TV station , who show the bulk of the UK cricket coverage, to predict the flight a ball subjected to an LBW decision would have taken. Its a brilliant TV aid, and extremely sophisticated technology, but its only used by commentators, and has nothing to do with the umpires. I doubt it would ever find its way into cricket in any official capacity

    Cricket is a way cool game, and extremely nerdy. You have to admire any sport where a satisfying match can go on for a week and then end in a draw.

  9. Re:A similar technique has been used for cricket by scrutty · · Score: 1 · on Digital Baseball Umpires
    No, your link is to the third umpire, which actually is another umpire, who has access to a video replay. Their input on a decision is only allowed when called for by the match umpire, and only for a limited set of conditions.

    The article you link is commenting on an occasion when an experimental wider set of decisions were allowed for referral. As far as I know ( I'm a cricket follower, but not a fanatic ), the referrable decisions are still limited to run outs, , stumpings , boundary decisions and close catches Furthermore, they are only allowed to review the video replay a limited number of times.

    What you may be thinking of instead, is the extremely cool hawkeye system which is used by the channel4 TV station , who show the bulk of the UK cricket coverage, to predict the flight a ball subjected to an LBW decision would have taken. Its a brilliant TV aid, and extremely sophisticated technology, but its only used by commentators, and has nothing to do with the umpires. I doubt it would ever find its way into cricket in any official capacity

    Cricket is a way cool game, and extremely nerdy. You have to admire any sport where a satisfying match can go on for a week and then end in a draw.