在转诊制度增加理性?

继布拉德的以前的职位,2011年ICC板球世界杯在次大陆已接近顶峰。今天的印度和巴基斯坦之间的半决赛将是一大亮点 - 没有人需要提醒一下这两个宿敌之间的历史。无论谁获胜,将满足斯里兰卡,谁在另一场半决赛昨晚占新西兰,确保赢家将是巡回赛共同主办的一个。

Other highlights have included Ireland’s upset win over England, the stunning 338-338 tie between India and England, the end of three-time reigning champion Australia’s 34-match World Cup unbeaten streak, and New Zealand’s unexpected quarter-final rout of the highly-fancied South Africa.

看着自己的动作数量有限,只有一个方面已经站出来为我作为一个经济学家。我怀疑的板球运动员已经越来越(虽然逐渐)在合理的使用,因为在2008年这项运动的转诊制度的第一次审判的挑战。

有几个这样的实例,但一个证明它最深的是澳大利亚(前任)队长里奇庞廷,谁在反对斯里兰卡A组比赛在科伦坡,授权二级(最终失败)的前中过挑战球员们在球场被迫因雨(它被证明是玩的最后阶段,随着比赛最终被放弃)。

With the rain already falling, one suspects that we can apportion some of his decision to the fact that, had the challenges been upheld (and taking the imminent loss of playing time into account), Australia’s Duckworth-Lewis revised target in the second innings (had the rain stopped eventually and Australia batted with reduced overs) would have been amended downwards, purely on the basis of Sri Lanka having lost an extra wicket. [Disclaimer: I am going to give Ponting the benefit of the doubt that he at least has half-a-brain.]

类似的现象似乎都发生在网球,因为首次挑战系统是运行在2007年澳大利亚网球公开赛(球员们每一套三个不成功的挑战开始),在这里每个人似乎最沉默寡言使用他们的挑战。现在,他们似乎不受限制地使用它们,硬拼所以当他们接近失去集,(正确地)观看他们,如果设定的目的和不成功的挑战数重新组基本上沉没的资源。

我有兴趣招揽的意见TSE在这一个读者。此外,令人惊讶的是,没有人还没有把这个假设的测试正式。有什么想法吗?

标签 理性