England v Australia, 4th Investec Test, Durham August 10, 2013

Remove protective coating for Hot Spot - Brennan

85

Hot Spot inventor Warren Brennan has called for protective coatings to be removed from bats in order to achieve the most accurate thermal imaging results. Brennan has broken his silence on the Hot Spot debate of the past week, releasing a statement that did not mention silicone-tape but said the thermal signatures of cricket bats were "unquestionably" affected by their protective coatings.

A number of edges have failed to show up on Hot Spot during the ongoing Ashes series, leaving the players uncertain of whether to use reviews or not. Following the Old Trafford Test, Channel Nine in Australia reported the ICC was investigating the possibility that players were using silicone-tape on the edges of their bats during this series in a deliberate effort to fool Hot Spot.

However, the ICC dismissed those claims and the captains of both sides rubbished the idea that any of their players would set out to cheat the DRS. Brennan, who had initially declined to comment on the debate, has now released a statement in which he said that his company, BBG Sports, had tested a range of the latest cricket bats over the past week and found that their protective coating can reduce the likelihood of edges showing up on Hot Spot.

"Following the Manchester Test match earlier this week, BBG Sports analysed contentious Hot Spot decisions from the Ashes series and decided to purchase several of the latest generation of cricket bats to undertake thorough testing," the BBG statement said. "BBG Sports observed that the majority of bats had some form of protective coating that would wrap around onto the edges of the bat.

"Strangely enough, this protective coating would cover only half of the edge of the bat and not the entire edge of the bat. BBG Sports believed this could cause the front edge of the bat to have a different thermal signature than the back edge of the bat. BBG Sports' own internal testing over the past three days utilizing the latest generation of cricket bats has, in their opinion, provided conclusive findings.

"The type and thickness of the protective coating unquestionably affects the thermal signature of the Hot Spot system. In layman's terms, the protective coating definitely diminishes Hot Spot marks. BBG Sports advised the ICC earlier this week on these initial findings and has committed to further testing over the coming weeks.

"BBG Sports believes that in order to achieve optimum Hot Spot results the removal of protective coating from bats and edges needs to occur. This will allow for the best thermal signatures between cricket balls and natural timber cricket bats."

However, the ICC is unlikely to enforce any such rules, given that batsmen have been using protective coatings on their bats for many years. Earlier this week, Australia's captain Michael Clarke said that every bat he had owned since he was about 12 had featured a protective layer in order to increase the bat's longevity, and most bats these days incorporate some form of such protection.

The ICC's umpires manager, Simon Taufel, also said earlier this week that for the past three years, Test umpires have carried out random bat inspections roughly 12 times per Test and not once has a batsman been found to have used silicone-tape in an attempt to trick the technology. Taufel said if such tape was found on the edges, a player would be liable for a breach of the Code of Conduct.

Hot Spot was again the centre of attention on the first morning of the Chester-le-Street Test, but this time the system worked as intended. Joe Root was adjudged not out by the on-field umpire Tony Hill but after Australia asked for a review, a faint edge showed up on Hot Spot and the decision was overturned.

Brydon Coverdale is an assistant editor at ESPNcricinfo. He tweets here

Comments have now been closed for this article

  • PanGlupek on August 14, 2013, 9:00 GMT

    Although this doesn't sound good, the fact that the technology isn't perfect shouldn't be used as an excuse not to use DRS:-

    a) Even if there was no technology used, except slow-mo-replays, it would still be worth having just to improve the number of correct decisions.

    b) The ICC have to allow the umpires a little more leeway than to simply follow the technology. Proper conversation between on-field & TV umpires, instead of protocol, "Did hotspot show anything? No" would help get decision right, even when technology doesn't do it's job, would help.

    c) Deliberately putting stickers on bats to prevent hotspot showing nicks would be quite stupid - imagine being given out LBW to a ball you've nicked the leather off, you review it, and are given out, based on nothing showing on hotspot?!

  • balajik1968 on August 12, 2013, 9:55 GMT

    DRicherby that was great. But just think, each time you have to go in for a new bat and a new ball. Just think, how much fun the umpire will have changing the ball each time there is an edge (depending on how old the ball is). The fielders will have to wear fire-proof gloves to protect their hand. What about the bowler, if the ball flies back to him, he should keep a set of gloves tucked in his pant; better still give them to the umpire for safekeeping, and the umpire should allow for bump catches for the bowlers considering the time factor. Revolution in the game!!!!

  • satishchandar on August 12, 2013, 7:55 GMT

    @DRicherby : Epic.. Really epic one mate.. Hope the keepers and fielders are allowed to wear protective gloves to catch the fire balls.. Else, no point in making things simpler for DRS if the ball is not caught after all.. You get the "Nayee soch" award and deserve to be in DRS panel..

  • vrn59 on August 12, 2013, 6:50 GMT

    @DRicherby: haha, that's a very interesting suggestion. But if the batsman top edges the ball to third man or even the keeper, won't they get injured? It would be red hot!

  • balajik1968 on August 12, 2013, 6:48 GMT

    Bats were being taped long before Hot Spot was even conceived. For Brennan to suggest that this must now be stopped just because Hot Spot is now being called into question is preposterous. Already, one of the bat makers has gone on the offensive against Brennan. This shows sloppiness on both the part of the technology supplier and the ICC.

  • vinayjayaram on August 12, 2013, 6:12 GMT

    @DRicherby : Sensational stuff!! Will make for great viewing..but feel bad for the batsmen though..losing a bat every time they nick one..

  • crick_sucks on August 12, 2013, 5:08 GMT

    DRS is getting murkier by the day and more inefficiencies of the technology come out to the open. Snicko is not reliable, hotspot is not reliable and everyone doubts the hawk eye's ball tracking abilities. So what is reliable and 100% accurate in DRS then? Dalmiya is asking the right questions.

  • satishchandar on August 12, 2013, 1:57 GMT

    What if shine of ball causes the issue> Will you remove the shine of the balls? Come on makers.. Pacve some other means to do it.. Stickers in the bats are used for long long time in cricket.. If you guys think that the batsmen use the additional stickers in order to cheat technology, be open and say it loud in public.. Else, work on your product.. As some asks below, what sort of bats are used to test the hotspot? Was it really tested before it is actually started to use in the games at all? This really puts ICC in a bad spot.. How reliable will be a untested technology? Come on ICC.. As i always saym instead of vying for a inconsistent incompetent expensive technology, go for lot cheaper options.. As of now, most of the decisions referred go as "On field decision stays".. Why do we need to spend such huge cost for this? Go with super slowmo and pitch map.. that is good enough option to eliminate howlers..

  • on August 11, 2013, 14:45 GMT

    Whether or not hotspots always show up is not the issue. The fact that in SOME instances it will detect a dismissal/non-dismissal means that it is a necessary tool to be utilized. Just think of it as an alternative camera angle. I think the distinction has occurred via some players using a coating on their bats and others choosing not to. Batsmen have long oiled, taped and coated their bats in cricket, so outlawing it seems unreasonable on the basis of a technology which in due fairness only was introduced to dispute the decisions of umpires. Again' many decades of "purely" officiated series rarely left a bad taste in the mouth of a cricket fan, EVEN when your team had suffered at the wrong end of a "poor decision." it was something to simply to "suck-up" and move on from. The whole system of DRS undermines the umpires in general, effectively vilifying them and having a resultant effect of making them question their own judgement.

  • DRicherby on August 11, 2013, 12:21 GMT

    Wait, I have the solution! Introduce a mandatory coating of powdered glass and red phosphorus for the edges of bats, which must be the top layer of coating. Impregnate the ball with potassium chlorate and sulphur. Now, if the batsman gets an edge, the ball will catch fire, exactly like striking a match -- a real hot spot! This will eliminate all doubt about whether a batsman hit the ball, making cricket a fairer sport and taking much of the stress out of umpiring. It will also add excitement and spectacle for the crowd and the slow-motion replays on the TV will look *awesome*.

    If anyone from the ICC is reading, please get in touch. I will license this technology to you for a very reasonable fee.

  • PanGlupek on August 14, 2013, 9:00 GMT

    Although this doesn't sound good, the fact that the technology isn't perfect shouldn't be used as an excuse not to use DRS:-

    a) Even if there was no technology used, except slow-mo-replays, it would still be worth having just to improve the number of correct decisions.

    b) The ICC have to allow the umpires a little more leeway than to simply follow the technology. Proper conversation between on-field & TV umpires, instead of protocol, "Did hotspot show anything? No" would help get decision right, even when technology doesn't do it's job, would help.

    c) Deliberately putting stickers on bats to prevent hotspot showing nicks would be quite stupid - imagine being given out LBW to a ball you've nicked the leather off, you review it, and are given out, based on nothing showing on hotspot?!

  • balajik1968 on August 12, 2013, 9:55 GMT

    DRicherby that was great. But just think, each time you have to go in for a new bat and a new ball. Just think, how much fun the umpire will have changing the ball each time there is an edge (depending on how old the ball is). The fielders will have to wear fire-proof gloves to protect their hand. What about the bowler, if the ball flies back to him, he should keep a set of gloves tucked in his pant; better still give them to the umpire for safekeeping, and the umpire should allow for bump catches for the bowlers considering the time factor. Revolution in the game!!!!

  • satishchandar on August 12, 2013, 7:55 GMT

    @DRicherby : Epic.. Really epic one mate.. Hope the keepers and fielders are allowed to wear protective gloves to catch the fire balls.. Else, no point in making things simpler for DRS if the ball is not caught after all.. You get the "Nayee soch" award and deserve to be in DRS panel..

  • vrn59 on August 12, 2013, 6:50 GMT

    @DRicherby: haha, that's a very interesting suggestion. But if the batsman top edges the ball to third man or even the keeper, won't they get injured? It would be red hot!

  • balajik1968 on August 12, 2013, 6:48 GMT

    Bats were being taped long before Hot Spot was even conceived. For Brennan to suggest that this must now be stopped just because Hot Spot is now being called into question is preposterous. Already, one of the bat makers has gone on the offensive against Brennan. This shows sloppiness on both the part of the technology supplier and the ICC.

  • vinayjayaram on August 12, 2013, 6:12 GMT

    @DRicherby : Sensational stuff!! Will make for great viewing..but feel bad for the batsmen though..losing a bat every time they nick one..

  • crick_sucks on August 12, 2013, 5:08 GMT

    DRS is getting murkier by the day and more inefficiencies of the technology come out to the open. Snicko is not reliable, hotspot is not reliable and everyone doubts the hawk eye's ball tracking abilities. So what is reliable and 100% accurate in DRS then? Dalmiya is asking the right questions.

  • satishchandar on August 12, 2013, 1:57 GMT

    What if shine of ball causes the issue> Will you remove the shine of the balls? Come on makers.. Pacve some other means to do it.. Stickers in the bats are used for long long time in cricket.. If you guys think that the batsmen use the additional stickers in order to cheat technology, be open and say it loud in public.. Else, work on your product.. As some asks below, what sort of bats are used to test the hotspot? Was it really tested before it is actually started to use in the games at all? This really puts ICC in a bad spot.. How reliable will be a untested technology? Come on ICC.. As i always saym instead of vying for a inconsistent incompetent expensive technology, go for lot cheaper options.. As of now, most of the decisions referred go as "On field decision stays".. Why do we need to spend such huge cost for this? Go with super slowmo and pitch map.. that is good enough option to eliminate howlers..

  • on August 11, 2013, 14:45 GMT

    Whether or not hotspots always show up is not the issue. The fact that in SOME instances it will detect a dismissal/non-dismissal means that it is a necessary tool to be utilized. Just think of it as an alternative camera angle. I think the distinction has occurred via some players using a coating on their bats and others choosing not to. Batsmen have long oiled, taped and coated their bats in cricket, so outlawing it seems unreasonable on the basis of a technology which in due fairness only was introduced to dispute the decisions of umpires. Again' many decades of "purely" officiated series rarely left a bad taste in the mouth of a cricket fan, EVEN when your team had suffered at the wrong end of a "poor decision." it was something to simply to "suck-up" and move on from. The whole system of DRS undermines the umpires in general, effectively vilifying them and having a resultant effect of making them question their own judgement.

  • DRicherby on August 11, 2013, 12:21 GMT

    Wait, I have the solution! Introduce a mandatory coating of powdered glass and red phosphorus for the edges of bats, which must be the top layer of coating. Impregnate the ball with potassium chlorate and sulphur. Now, if the batsman gets an edge, the ball will catch fire, exactly like striking a match -- a real hot spot! This will eliminate all doubt about whether a batsman hit the ball, making cricket a fairer sport and taking much of the stress out of umpiring. It will also add excitement and spectacle for the crowd and the slow-motion replays on the TV will look *awesome*.

    If anyone from the ICC is reading, please get in touch. I will license this technology to you for a very reasonable fee.

  • SlipsGlance on August 11, 2013, 12:19 GMT

    You're not alone, @Tumbarumbar. Your foil + plasticine backing idea is brilliant.

    I'm a believer in the technology and think it will get better and better, but it makes me very sceptical when the vendor of one of these systems claims that it's 100% accurate, as I believe the Hawkeye spokesman did a couple of years ago. Even if it's only 99% accurate and that can be verified by independent testing, that's fantastic and much better than human error. But claiming 100% correctness makes you doubt either the promoters' motives or their sanity.

    Another improvement I'd like to see is to show the degree of fuzziness or uncertainty in the Hawkeye animation. It's plausible that in most cases Hawkeye can tell where the ball would strike the stumps to within a cm or so, but the animation *always* shows perfect sharp precision, no matter how closely they zoom in. Decisions are made based on whether the animation (simulation) shows two stitches outside the line and four stitches inside--ludicrous.

  • DRicherby on August 11, 2013, 12:09 GMT

    Brennan implies that he sold his technology to the ICC without actually testing it on bats that professional cricketers use -- what on earth did he test it on? And, then, when it's revealed that his product barely works, he has the breath-taking arrogance to propose the solution of changing cricket, rather than going back to the drawing board and improving his product. Why doesn't BBG Sports have a continuous testing programme to monitor how, for example, perfectly innocent changes in bat coatings, ball composition and maybe even atmospheric conditions affect Hot Spot results? The ICC should be asking for their money back.

    I just had a thought. The shiny side of the ball surely causes a less distinct thermal signature than the rough side. Quick, Warren -- you need to get the ICC to ban swing bowling!

  • Jagger on August 11, 2013, 11:39 GMT

    Here's a better idea, just get rid of DRS.

  • TommytuckerSaffa on August 11, 2013, 11:20 GMT

    DRS correctly overturns 3 decisions in this mornings Australian innings of the Ashes. Funny how when technology works nobody complains about it, but when 3rd umpires misuse it - its then the technology's fault.

    Where are all you DRS detractors now? Probably still living in their caves.

  • cnksnk on August 11, 2013, 10:22 GMT

    I hope I am not reading this right. The company has started buying and testing the latest bats after 3 tests in which HotSpot did not work the way it should have. I am even surprised at the level of non professionalism. If you are making and selling a product in the market then the minimum that you are expected to do is

    1) Test the product in various situations to ensure that it works consistently. 2) keep testing on a continuous basis so that the product is updated. 3) Keep innovating so that the product is improved along with changes in technology.

    It seems , from the statement, atleast that BBG sports has not done any of the above and have started testing the efficacy of the product after all the noice and errors of 3 tests. Surely for this reason alone this product and company must be "grey"listed and handled with care.

    May be BCCI was right in that they said technology was not proven and needs more refinement before it can be put to use. This seems to vindicate BCCI.

  • Salmans_A_Qureshi on August 11, 2013, 10:19 GMT

    Overall, DRS/hotspot is helping out much for better decisions and doing NOTHING wrong to the game. If hotspot is not conclusive, on field umpire sticks to his decision (as if hot spot never existed). So DRS/hotspot did not have its part in wrong decision.

  • on August 11, 2013, 9:51 GMT

    The third umpire DRS decisions are fast becoming the "howlers" that they themselves were supposed to prevent!!

  • on August 11, 2013, 9:35 GMT

    .... being a company that sells expensive military grade thermal sensors, you would think they would have carried out tests on various bats BEFORE hand rather than wait for a news channel to propagate rumours before verifying it.

    I am proponent of using technology, and I know this isn't the ICC's fault but there seems to be incompetence on every level of this great sport. Such a shame.

  • on August 11, 2013, 9:24 GMT

    Let's indeed change the rules of the game to accomodate the means of sanctioning it.I thought sports were there to take your mind off the daily routine, instead it it's starting to copy real life. Weird world we're living in.

  • on August 11, 2013, 9:24 GMT

    Never thought I would say this but BCCI have been correct in their approach this time. Whether you believe DRS should be used or not, it is clear that this system is not quite refined yet. Top level international sport should not be used for beta testing of a work in progress. I hope we do not go on changing rules to accommodate this limited technology. Of course the technology is not flawed. It does what it can do. It's the people who exaggerate its capabilities and want to push it forward without adequate testing who are at fault.

  • naveen1122 on August 11, 2013, 9:24 GMT

    Inventions should be added to the game for its development. It has been happening all the way from the beginning of this wonderful game. Technology should definitely be used for the betterment of the game in general, but never for the thriving of one nation who always failed to use it correctly. Indians are always being so negative about using the DRS to improve the game. Just because Dhoni consistently failed to use DRS in one of their SL tours, couple of years back, whole the India are opposing the system. Think the other way, Mahela used it so successfully throughout the tournament, which prevented so many mistakes from the game. There are always pros and cons in anything, but we should be careful to take only the pluses and go forward, instead od being so negative on anything. Why the BCCI wouldn't call off the IPL that is so detrimental to the Real Game of Cricket.

  • The_Mystery_Ball on August 11, 2013, 9:11 GMT

    All those people who are asking for the DRS to be removed from the game are naive at best. Sure the technology is not a hundred percent but that does not mean that the entire system is flawed. Its just like modern X-Rays, they ask you to remove all metal from your body so as to get the most accurate results, this does not mean that the medical industry outrightly rejects X-Ray. Sure there are some flaws in the DRS but it is still efficient enough to remove the howlers the only problem is in its application which unfortunately is in the hands of the players.

  • IndiaNumeroUno on August 11, 2013, 7:57 GMT

    Simple solution. Get rid of DRS and its complications. Ball (non)tracking out, Coldspot out, Snicko is useless too as you never know what/when the sound is actually for... Just a simple TV replay (and super/slow motion) watched by third umpire... that's more than enough to take away any howlers. This should also save money to spend on the actual game itself and facilities.

  • IndiaNumeroUno on August 11, 2013, 7:31 GMT

    I cannot believe that people are still saying there is nothing wrong with DRS. All right keep your heads in the sand!. A very basic test anyone would do for a "hotspot" system like this is with the various tapes people use on bats to increase longevity of it (nothing sinister). Hotspot has been in place for quite a while and it's only now we are coming out with this revelation that such a basic test has not been done?! I wonder when someone will put their hands up and say ball tracking is really just based on linear extapolation.. not really tested for anything more complicated.. sorry.. oh but all this is only 15000 USD to use for the day.. thank you very much :)

  • Tumbarumbar on August 11, 2013, 7:29 GMT

    'My system doesn't work so change the game'. That's essentially what the inventor is saying. It shows the blokes total lack of knowledge about cricket if he believes that it's possible to use a pressed rather than rolled bat without some form of protective covering. Not only would players be going through multiple bats over the course of a long innings due to damage to the face and edges but the ball would deteriorate much faster as the surface scuffed from hitting irregularities in the bat's face. Also am I alone in wanting to see a physical test of hawkeyes accuracy? A real test like balls bowled through hanging strips of light foil that hit a plasticine wall past the wicket so we can all see the actual finishing point versus the predicted finishing point. Just 3mm would have meant the difference between a wicket and no wicket in many cases.

  • on August 11, 2013, 7:15 GMT

    @Pelham_Barton !00% agree

  • on August 11, 2013, 7:03 GMT

    There is nothing wrong with the hotspot as it is, but as Atherton said "There is no problem with the DRS , it's just the people that are using it needs more training" I agree with him where I believe that rather then a standard umpire, a DRS umpire is required, this will improve cricket as well as FairPlay!

  • the_blue_android on August 11, 2013, 6:45 GMT

    @Landl47 - Hotspot itself is a backup system to onfield umpires! You want a backup system for a backup system? What if snicko has its share of issues? Backup to a backup to a backup? Cricket and especially test cricket is almost a dead sport. If we keep adding more and more technicalities, nobody even in test playing nations would follow test cricket in another 10 years, let alone spreading to other countries.

  • the_blue_android on August 11, 2013, 6:39 GMT

    Excuses, suggestions, improvements! This guy is typical of top level management of a big corporate! Once the bat coatings are removed, and system still has issues, next will be the blade angle. 90 degree blade edges only allowed, after that it will be the type of wood, oakwood better than this wood and that wood! Then it's something else.... By the time ICC figures out it's all hogwash, a decade would have passes and it's time for Warren to retire with millions in his bank account!

  • Sarfin on August 11, 2013, 6:37 GMT

    The first question is why on earth didn't you consider this factor before? Cricket should be played as it is. Cricket and cricketers are not test subjects. You can't call for removing tapes. Other supporting things should adapt. No other way. Hot spot should be improved to capture faint edges on taped bats. If not, good bye. Coming from a DRS supporter.

  • gsingh7 on August 11, 2013, 6:36 GMT

    drs has short half life now that inventor had admitted its obvious flaws. cant detect in hot weather , cant detect faint edges , cant detect thick and massive sound producing edges if some tape is present over the bats' edge(deliberate or not). then why spend massive sums of hard earned dollars on this half baked system. bring better system , field test it. formulate the results, put some decisive conclusions. most importantly ,convince people who will be using it, rather than implement it with closed eyes and ears over all cricket boards. bcci stand against drs is vindicated , at last.

  • joneywsly on August 11, 2013, 6:21 GMT

    my doubt is, should cricket follow technology and change the rules of game, or should the technology adapt to the way cricket is played, certainly if i am a company owner, i'll prefer the game rules be changed to my technology, so no question in bernnan statement, but should ICC consider changing rules for bat or should they scrap a worthless DRS system, until its flaw is removed???

  • jango_moh on August 11, 2013, 6:21 GMT

    i hope ppl supporting hotspot atleast can open their eyes, and realize that the ICC and cricket commentators were rushing to include hotspot etc without even getting full QA done on it, the manufacturer is gravely irresponsible for not having done proper QA before delivering a product!!

  • sundar_p63 on August 11, 2013, 5:52 GMT

    Looks like a lame excuse to hide the obvious flaws that were exposed

  • gdalvi on August 11, 2013, 5:44 GMT

    I think DRS supporters who keep harping that it improves accuracy - fail to understand why that is not enough and why this technology should be very close to 100% correct as BCCI demands. Basically DRS is a form of justice system - meant to correct the obvious wrongs (a.ka. howlers). Now in a democratic world which all cricket nations are to some degree - you expect the Justice system to be fair and balanced with a sound decision every single time. Injustices meted out by Justice system are immediately citied as FAILURE of justice system and people demand complete overhaul. No-one says OK the justice system is only 60% correct - so lets continue with same system. Same with DRS. It has to be perceived as close to 100% - otherwise you are better off with no system. as was the case before.

  • IndianSRTfan on August 11, 2013, 5:40 GMT

    The problem is not that Hot Spot has flaws. The problem is that the nature of flaws in Hot Spot and factors that affect it are so basic that it is baffling to think how these factors were not considered before the technology was deployed.

    Bat coatings have been used for a long time in Cricket and if a factor as basic as this wasn't considered before using Hot Spot, who is to say how many other basic faults were overlooked? ICC, in it's haste to bring "cutting-edge technology" into the game, seems to have not bothered with basic QA activities! Even this limitation came to light because company that invented the Hot Spot, carried out some tests because of recent events. My question is why didn't the ICC itself bother to do extensive tests with inputs from experts before?

    Hot Spot technology may be cutting edge but if it is not scalable, robust, and most importantly, SUITABLE for the game, there is no point in using it. ICC should really take a leaf out of FIFA's book in this regard.

  • Min2000 on August 11, 2013, 5:10 GMT

    In the past, hotspot (love it or hate it) seems to have worked very well. Even the slightest nick would show clearly on the bat, and sometimes the ball too. Now all of a sudden in this series, some very obvious edges (KP, Root etc) have failed to show a mark. Even tho it didnt save either of the batsmen mentioned above it does seem slightly suspicious...

  • Biso on August 11, 2013, 4:59 GMT

    @Jonatham potter. Well said. I suspect the third Umpires have already begun implementing the same. They do have a conscience. Whether the law backs them or not , seems they have already decided to place common sense before anything else. Whereas, we have been harping on evidence as provided by these systems, they have already decided to shun such evidence as spurious based on intuition or maybe calculated guesswork. Lol

  • jack500197 on August 11, 2013, 4:58 GMT

    One would think this was tested thoroughly before it was put in place, is that not the case? I agree with Michael Clarke protective coatings have existed in bats for a very long time. Warren Brennan, please provide ICC results of testing that was perfromed before HOt spot was implemented. There is no way ICC will ask players to remove prtective layer from bats.

  • on August 11, 2013, 4:55 GMT

    There are specific laws on all Stickers and Protective Coatings on Bats, how big and where they can be place MCC enforces these laws and ICC have to abide them. Please Warren Brennan if you want to reduce Bat live write to MCC and give them you facts, and maybe the Members will consider.

    What Warren Brennan needs to Is School the Use of Hotspot and and come to a Point, and not blame others, as he did state, hotspot can be affected by High heat. Point being Use Hotspot in Revues, Stop using Snicko and Audio, Microphone is at base of stumps and can pick up various noises, Easy solution No Hotspot - Not out Hotspot on Bat -Out Simple really, leave snicko to commentators And other thing Umpires call, lets change that to minimum of 50% of the ball has to hit the stumps to be called out, any less not out, Umpires call scraped

  • on August 11, 2013, 4:34 GMT

    Hot spot is a joke. Hot spot should be looking at ways to improve their technology not change the way bats are protected. Afterall, bats have been around far longer than any thermal technology.

    DRS just needs to be slo-mo cameras. No need for anything else to prevent howlers.

  • on August 11, 2013, 3:13 GMT

    Well he had to blame it on something. this is like making the game really complex, i mean he is basically saying that the technology of the making and protecting the bats all around the world should be altered so that Hot Spot could fit in, which is ridiculous. Bye Bye HotSpot

  • on August 11, 2013, 3:04 GMT

    The technology needs to be improved, rather than calling for a fundamental change in the way bats are made! The bats have long been this way, so the maker of Hot Spot is essentially saying that his system has never actually been an accurate tool. I find this disappointing, since I support the use of a technology like hot spot... Just one that works! As the system stands now, Hot Spot should only be admissible as POSITIVE evidence: ie, if it DOES show an edge, conclusions can be drawn, since there has been little talk of false positives. But no conclusions should be drawn from a LACK of a thermal hot spot, since the system is susceptible to false negatives.

  • Bob_Shisky on August 11, 2013, 2:15 GMT

    Personally I think Hot Spot does add to the shorter forms of the game and it is worth working through the issues. Mr Brennan said they tested several types of coatings. Is this issue limited to silicone tapes? Perhaps it is possible to formulate tapes that do not impair hot spot technology. I suspect that the tapes would be voluntarily removed if they increased the detection rate.

  • on August 11, 2013, 1:56 GMT

    Just remove hotspot and be done with it already - this is getting weirder by the minute. You cannot impose a rule where batsman can't have protective coatings on the bat. Whats next? The hot spot inventor will claim that the advertising stickers on the bats are extending to the edges and thus affecting hot spot and thus these need to be got rid of as well??? Of course he will never make such a claim as he knows that ICC will shut down hot spot in a second if he does that - but those stickers cant be too different from the various coatings right???

  • DRS_Flawed_NeedsImprovement on August 11, 2013, 1:43 GMT

    next time gloves and after that helmet, finally players will be asked to play nakedly.

  • Biso on August 11, 2013, 1:31 GMT

    Not enough testing has been done before implementation of these systems at the highest level. No point patronising such products and expect the makers to improve upon them as time goes on. We are seeing the results of a hurried /unscientific /unmanaged implementation of technology. That is the real howler. I do not blame the technology.

  • Biso on August 11, 2013, 1:24 GMT

    @ruester and landl47: Bang on. That is hotspot howler for yu. This was an open secret though and I bet quite a few players knew that hopspot could be fooled and so did the umpires. We can now appreciate the confusion the third umpires are subject to. And those of you who are looking for some magic wand in snicko- kindly appreciate that two objects moving fast, past each other ( at small distance between them) will cause compression-decompression of the local air mass and hence a signature. How well the umpire differentiates between this and the actual contact is anybody' s guess. Hawkeye, has limitations too and quite significant calling for educating the umpires in their use. Leaving third umpires job to the TV companies will be a major howler. They are competent enough to manipulate for obvious reasons. The position of the standard cameras is also at an angle to the pitch. The point is, these technologies have to be improved/replaced with better/tested well before implementation.

  • phermon on August 11, 2013, 1:02 GMT

    Brydon, I am concerned about your last paragraph. I thought DRS was there to prevent howlers - not to overturn highly marginal decisions. The almost invisible hotspot on Root's bat was so marginal that it was as likely to have been caused by an expletive flying back from slips as an edge. Can hotspot determine the direction or temperature of the nick? bobmartin - what has logic got to do with cricket? But there are also a number of other factors - so I am not drawing any conclusions - apart from "take the nerds out of the game".

  • kapsy on August 11, 2013, 0:42 GMT

    Dear ICC & Warren Brennan, It's quite alright to use your brain sometimes. ALL that you need to do is to brush every batsman's bat with thermal friendly dust every time he steps out to play. It's NOT ROCKET SCIENCE!!

  • on August 11, 2013, 0:31 GMT

    Get rid of the technology.Use the two umpire's that are on the ground,their word is final,It's worked for over one hundred years this way.We don't need this high tech gear.

  • linusjf on August 11, 2013, 0:31 GMT

    Wouldn't it just be simpler if all players were forced to apply something unobtrusive that would enhance Hotstop captured edges instead? Is that possible? Just off the top of my head!

  • on August 11, 2013, 0:29 GMT

    Cannot understand how this technology is not tested properly before introducing at the highest level. Faint edges has been a problem for decades and the technology was ment to overcome it. This not a place for field trial and should be tested at a lower level before even introducing it. I think ICC should consider forming a tech team for improving this side of the game. If they already have one then they are doing nothing but copying a tech from another sport and not customizing/testing for cricket.

    I feel cricket is much better off without DRS. All DRS has done is create insecurity among umpires and players.

  • phermon on August 11, 2013, 0:16 GMT

    Delighted to see that the bulk of opinion here is in favour of the game as opposed to nerds who make money out of ruining its quirkiness. Brylcream never hurt anyone apart from Barrington's appearance.

  • RogerC on August 11, 2013, 0:09 GMT

    Like them or hate them, BCCI is dead right about DRS.

  • BlackShipWreck on August 10, 2013, 23:36 GMT

    The lengths England stoop to, to win at cricket never ceases to amaze me. First substitute fielder abuse followed by ball tampering (mint sweeties), then throwing jelly beans on the wicket, then timewasting and now deliberate ploys to fool hotspot. And the spineless ICC do nothing. What a joke cricket has become.

  • on August 10, 2013, 21:53 GMT

    Even though I dislike the fact that technology is taking over cricket I remember when my Aunty Bessie bowled overarm to W. G. Grace. There was a furore and shouting from tall buildings not from the fact that a woman had bowled the ball, but the fact that she had raised her arm above her head before releasing the ball. We got over that situation as we will with DRS. In conclusion I would like to go back to the old ways of the infield umpires making all the calls, but as Greg Chappell proved the old ways aren't nesessarily the good ways.

  • on August 10, 2013, 21:29 GMT

    The scuff sheets protect the cricket bat from cracks and breakages, and makes refurbishments easier. They've been around for several years longer than HotSpot, they need to find a away to get round that issue. Simple.

  • on August 10, 2013, 21:17 GMT

    why should cricketers alter what they have been doing for years, taping bats has been around for decades and this guy just wants people to stop using it because his technology isn't up to the job. If the technology isn't up to the standard why are we still using it. maybe they should be fixing their broken system instead of moaning about it.

  • bobmartin on August 10, 2013, 17:41 GMT

    Hot Spot been in use since DRS was instituted and altho there has been the odd incident, these were generally accepted as part and parcel of the game. So why has this recent spate of failures by Hot Spot to detect edges come about ?.. Logic would point to the fact that something must have changed, and since there are only three components invloved... ie Hot Spot, ball and and bat... it can only be one of those. Draw your own conclusions..

  • xylo on August 10, 2013, 16:26 GMT

    The DRS is getting to be a big pain rather than be a saving grace. The game might benefit from scrapping the DRS altogether. If not, just use the snickometer and common-sense-o-meter.

  • WalkingWicket11 on August 10, 2013, 15:16 GMT

    Great going ICC, making rule patches as you go along. It's a good thing your "efforts" to globalize the game aren't getting anywhere, otherwise cricket would be ridiculed all over the world.

  • jiten785 on August 10, 2013, 14:54 GMT

    This just looks like there was more under the table stuff or lobbing done to bring on the hot spot technology without testing it or the company as intention to take over the cricketing products market by pushing for the cricketing gear compatible to their technology. So the whole game seems to not above the correctness of the technology but the power struggle between BCCI and the some boards supporting the hotspot.

  • on August 10, 2013, 14:49 GMT

    Why are people trying to target Brennan ? He has indicated before & claims the same - protective coatings reduce thermal impact and therefore make it more difficult for HotSpot to detect edges....Statement of fact. It is for ICC to decide whether they want to use this flawed technology as is, throw it out OR issue an order banning protective coatings n bats to make the technology effective. Decisions are all for ICC to make.

  • Cricfever_PM on August 10, 2013, 14:32 GMT

    It's really worst day for Hot spot!! I wonder why so many questioned raised now but why not there were minimal errors in the past compared to this Ashes!! Nothing wrong in using technology but why do you wanna use the technology which creating problem for most of the cases!! Today you ask to remove the top coating and tomorrow you ask to remove the sponsors on the bat and what else to follow!! The cricket was not having much controversy when there was no DRS or review system!! So to save the game pls give 100 pc authority to on field/3rd umpires!!

  • ac_Indian on August 10, 2013, 14:23 GMT

    this is ridiculous. now we start altering bats to somehow fit into drs' tolerances. I hope ICC does not budge to this.

  • on August 10, 2013, 14:22 GMT

    Take the coating off, why not? These guys get fresh bats for free whenever they want. And last time I checked my local cricket club doesn't have thermal imaging.

  • Twinkie on August 10, 2013, 14:13 GMT

    Can this get any more silly? Hot spot seems to have some problems it needs to fix, however, I thought the system was supposed to eliminate howlers. If so, hotspot shouldn't be such a big issue because thin edges are not howlers.

  • on August 10, 2013, 14:13 GMT

    Changing the bat is not an option. For a batsman his bat is very important it is very hard to switch bat. Over the period we have witness batsman's bring their old bat all strapped up in his important match because it has more moral value for a batsman's than the Hot Spot technology. Hot Spot technology has to evolve in cricket and cricket industry it needs to be tested by all cricket Council in the world. This technology should be tested in domestic level.

  • Pelham_Barton on August 10, 2013, 14:05 GMT

    Mr Brennan seems to be confused here. The idea is to use technology to optimise the playing of the game, not the other way round.

  • Philip_Gnana on August 10, 2013, 14:02 GMT

    Hot Spot is not fit for purpose, if they had not worked out things before hand. It is common knowledge that pads have a protective coating. How can they have the boldness to say that the bats need to be manufactured to their needs? This is precisely what they are saying between the lines.

    This is a huge and blaring error on their part.

    Stick to the snickometer and the deviation (slow moiton zoomed in) technology.

  • ruester on August 10, 2013, 13:59 GMT

    I have to question what bats the inventor of Hotspot used to test his product before he sold it to the ICC? Cricket bats protective tape and coating have been around for at least thirty years did he not think to test hotspot with actual modern bats or did he use a plank of wood? I would like to see hotspot not used from now on. Get it right and then reintroduce it when it is improved. Or just go back to on field umpires, I can live happily with human error.

  • on August 10, 2013, 13:56 GMT

    Fair enough, & those coatings should be replaced with some heat sensitive coatings.

  • on August 10, 2013, 13:40 GMT

    Lets just use snicko and leave the protective covering to givevthe bats loner life

  • crazyguru on August 10, 2013, 13:33 GMT

    for the best results we've to use than more technology. I think it would be very effective if we use three technologies at a time say hotspot, snicko and another one. batsmen may be given out if atleast two of the three technologies confirm the decision. this s a great way to reduce the errors. every technology is prone to some errors and i think this method will reduce them vastly

  • northumbriannomad on August 10, 2013, 13:29 GMT

    It sounds as though Brennan is in a total panic about his product. Yet all but two of the problems in this series have come about not through Hot Spot failures, but umpiring failures. The quality of umpiring, and TV umpiring in particular, is the issue that needs to be addressed.

    There is an unreasonable faith in technology. A senior Indian official the other day said he wouldn't accept DRS until it was "100% foolproof" - there is no such technology and there never will be. It's not supposed to be a 100% measurement of whether a decision is right or wrong. It's supposed to provide additional information to assist the umpires in getting decisions right. In the case of Pietersen's controversial undetected edge, for example, he was rightly given out because the umpire heard the click, even though Hot Spot did not detect it. The DRS provides evidence, the umpires evaluate it. The problems in this Ashes series are not with the former, but with the latter.

  • on August 10, 2013, 13:28 GMT

    Its not a responsible reply by Warren Brennan, he should focus on getting his technology right rather than blaming other people.

    game has been played in a certain way and i think we ought to maintain that

  • Teetotalers on August 10, 2013, 13:04 GMT

    Will this become a classic case of cat & mouse. As technology evolves so will the way to find a loophole. But it does not mean we should stop using technology for helping make the correct decisions. It just needs to be one step ahead of finding new loopholes.

  • sanjaycrickfan on August 10, 2013, 12:45 GMT

    I dont think Hot Spot should be used any more seeing as its creating more controversies than giving right decisions. It should be tested and improved a lot more before it can be allowed for international cricket.

  • on August 10, 2013, 12:40 GMT

    DRS without hot spot could be an options as the aim is to stop howlers, the technology should not be allowed to dictate about protective coating

  • landl47 on August 10, 2013, 12:38 GMT

    So Brennan's invented a product that doesn't work very well and is now suggesting that's because batsmen want to keep their bats from breaking every other game. How unreasonable of them.

    Hotspot has some value, but it has been vastly overstated by Brennan himself. He's now having to admit that in close calls it's not very reliable. Excuses as to why that is won't change the facts. We need a backup system (like automated snicko) to provide extra information that Hotspot apparently can't deliver.

  • Chetan007 on August 10, 2013, 12:24 GMT

    A lot of work needed to get best hot spot result. One option could have been tried by using a bit more thin protective coating than used now. Another Hot Spot camera should be placed more close or should have better resolution than used now.

  • on August 10, 2013, 12:21 GMT

    I am absolutely certain that the new technology will take another 3/4 years to be accepted worldwide provided that some much needed improvements will be done in the meantime!

  • malik_Tahir on August 10, 2013, 12:13 GMT

    I think the inventor has to improve his product. As he confesses that the coating can diminish the hot spot image it means it was not developed keeping in mind the on field situation as players are using these protective layers / coating from ages so it should have been considered before launching this technology into cricket. I think hot spot should be combined with scnikometer so that if there is a faint edge it will register on scniko. otherwise controversy will arise in the up coming matches as well.

  • 2MikeGattings on August 10, 2013, 12:01 GMT

    Nail. Meet coffin. Bye bye HotSpot!

  • No featured comments at the moment.

  • 2MikeGattings on August 10, 2013, 12:01 GMT

    Nail. Meet coffin. Bye bye HotSpot!

  • malik_Tahir on August 10, 2013, 12:13 GMT

    I think the inventor has to improve his product. As he confesses that the coating can diminish the hot spot image it means it was not developed keeping in mind the on field situation as players are using these protective layers / coating from ages so it should have been considered before launching this technology into cricket. I think hot spot should be combined with scnikometer so that if there is a faint edge it will register on scniko. otherwise controversy will arise in the up coming matches as well.

  • on August 10, 2013, 12:21 GMT

    I am absolutely certain that the new technology will take another 3/4 years to be accepted worldwide provided that some much needed improvements will be done in the meantime!

  • Chetan007 on August 10, 2013, 12:24 GMT

    A lot of work needed to get best hot spot result. One option could have been tried by using a bit more thin protective coating than used now. Another Hot Spot camera should be placed more close or should have better resolution than used now.

  • landl47 on August 10, 2013, 12:38 GMT

    So Brennan's invented a product that doesn't work very well and is now suggesting that's because batsmen want to keep their bats from breaking every other game. How unreasonable of them.

    Hotspot has some value, but it has been vastly overstated by Brennan himself. He's now having to admit that in close calls it's not very reliable. Excuses as to why that is won't change the facts. We need a backup system (like automated snicko) to provide extra information that Hotspot apparently can't deliver.

  • on August 10, 2013, 12:40 GMT

    DRS without hot spot could be an options as the aim is to stop howlers, the technology should not be allowed to dictate about protective coating

  • sanjaycrickfan on August 10, 2013, 12:45 GMT

    I dont think Hot Spot should be used any more seeing as its creating more controversies than giving right decisions. It should be tested and improved a lot more before it can be allowed for international cricket.

  • Teetotalers on August 10, 2013, 13:04 GMT

    Will this become a classic case of cat & mouse. As technology evolves so will the way to find a loophole. But it does not mean we should stop using technology for helping make the correct decisions. It just needs to be one step ahead of finding new loopholes.

  • on August 10, 2013, 13:28 GMT

    Its not a responsible reply by Warren Brennan, he should focus on getting his technology right rather than blaming other people.

    game has been played in a certain way and i think we ought to maintain that

  • northumbriannomad on August 10, 2013, 13:29 GMT

    It sounds as though Brennan is in a total panic about his product. Yet all but two of the problems in this series have come about not through Hot Spot failures, but umpiring failures. The quality of umpiring, and TV umpiring in particular, is the issue that needs to be addressed.

    There is an unreasonable faith in technology. A senior Indian official the other day said he wouldn't accept DRS until it was "100% foolproof" - there is no such technology and there never will be. It's not supposed to be a 100% measurement of whether a decision is right or wrong. It's supposed to provide additional information to assist the umpires in getting decisions right. In the case of Pietersen's controversial undetected edge, for example, he was rightly given out because the umpire heard the click, even though Hot Spot did not detect it. The DRS provides evidence, the umpires evaluate it. The problems in this Ashes series are not with the former, but with the latter.