this post was initiated in response to my friend ottayan's post of brad hogg saying that human element should be maintained...
first of all let me say, its very easy to say lets keep human element there when that 'human element' is not affecting you...there was one decisions against pointing and he was fuming like anything...where was human angle then??? and i am yet to see him being asked to report much like yuvraj but thats another matter altogether ;-)
anyway to come to point...
there was old time when we took fielders word for not touching boundary lines...for close catches...umpires word for run outs etc...and now we don't...
now, we spend endless time to see whether the rope was touched...no umpire today gives run out decision directly...does that effects umpires credibility when he refers upstairs?? i think it affects more if he don't?? isn't it?? so it means technology already creeping in...it also shows that we have changed with times...
the same doubts were raised when those referrals were okayed...but still we moved on with them and game has not changed much bcoz of them...its still a battle between bat and ball...
but, you cant have best of both world...it takes just one or two replays to see whether batsman is nicked it ala symonds...or there was inner edge for LBWs ala ponting...that the ball pitched outside leg stumps for LBWs...why on earth we can not reverse them...before player leave the field...this will most certainly take far less time than we spend on seeing the boundary lines replays...and it will most certainly not affect the credibility of umpires when they will refer it??? what if third umpire does it suo motto...???
why not start it in lets say T20s or bilateral ODI series to see the impact...when we can have that ridiculously implemented super-sub rule and more ridiculously scrapping it while it required just one fine tweaking...then why we can not implement these in as i suggested in T20s and/or bilateral ODI series...
its can not be plain coincidence that umpiring standards are getting downwards by the time...i mean who are interested in this career while more lucrative assignments are awaiting in media...with big screens installed in virtually every stadium now...i see them standing naked infront of world and amongst players in the park...and this isn't a good sight, is it?...what respect they would get from players when they can clearly see these howlers in big screens...leave alone the audience world over?...and yet we assume that they will not be affected by it...that they will keep on giving good decisions...are they robots who don't feel anything...?? so isnt it will be a worthy exercise if we do something which will be a step towards elimination such scenarios...
first step ICC can take in right direction is by not nominating buckner for any matches now onwards...its understandable why this old man is dragging himself but why ICC is letting him is beyond me!
which side are you?? letting these umpires handing us howlers everyday or steps to avoid these howlers??
have your say...
Which side are you??
shared by straight point on Thursday, January 03, 2008
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
19 comments:
Pan,
I am obviously on India's side.:)
I am not for any more technological intervention.The umpire has been reduced to a cipher.It has given rise to more controversy's and dissent.
Having said that, I would like the ICC to have rigourous physical standards in place when they nominate one.
I reliably learnt that Bucknor is not only an ass but he is also stone deaf.
Cheers
I'm on the side of whoever is right...
I find Ricky Ponting to be a hypocrite.
When he says dubious caught decisions should not be referred, stating that we should choose to believe the fielder, I could live with that argument, if he didn't have a team of guys who regularly fail to walk, when they know they're out.
How can you trust a man who doesn't walk, to tell the truth over a grassed catch..
Alongside that, Umpires should be held responsible, so that if they make more than two/three human errors in a test match, they are removed from the elite panel, until they have proven in lower level cricket, that they're up to the job.
Mark Benson, Rudi Koertzen and Steve Bucknor have made some shockers recently, and they will continue to do so, until something changes.
The other problem is, that it's easy to balme the umpires (England are masters at this), when it's going badly, but to allow it to affect your bowling/fielding to such an extent, that the last 4 wickets score 330 runs, is just unacceptable..
I like humans, aliens and blow up dolls.
So far i'm not a big fan of robots, computers or some system named hawkeye.
I think Suave hit it on the head with the relegation of umpires who fail, players get dropped why can't umpires.
The other thing is that even with technology they don't get all decisions right, according to you Symonds was out stumped, but he wasn't given, so how can more technology help, umpiring is a subjective art not an exact science.
This is just a game right?
OTT
i suggested some steps to lessen up if not entirely eliminate these controversies...
how letting them away with these blunders is going to check controversies is beyond me...
hi suave...welcome here...
relegation is nice suggestion...
the problem is with ICC...why are they playing ostrich...when they will wake up...what more unnecessary controversies they are waiting before they decide to act???
That's a valid argument, Straight Point..
But everyone in world cricket knows the ICC is inept! Look at the last ODI world cup.
I wouldn't hold your breath, waiting for them to change anything.
Oh and Sp i just added you to my blog roll, I can't believe you weren't on it, keep up the good work.
hey uncle,
i thought that i touched upon the human angle as well...though i am with you on that if players can be dropped then why not umps...
but either icc should ban these big size screens and ask producers to not air replays after replays of how umps made blunders...making them look stupid or should take some steps forward to bring some order...
can we let this drift forever...??
thanks uncle..
its nothing short of honor to be in your blog roll... :)
suvave...
thanks for the suggestion ;-)
but i fear that with more controversies related to umps happening...producers, commentators and media highlighting them like anything...who would come forward to see umpiring as viable career...??? who would be interested in seeing himself being ridiculed so much???
the problem is two fold...if ICC don't do anything they will be hurting the game anyway...so better the look this as serious and urgent problem...
Here is one suggestion.....In Americn football....there is something called challanging the call on the field and even it is being used by county cricket in england....:) Why cant we do that...we have people analyzing it...so why can we make use of it...lets say 3 challanges per inning?
that will stop huge errors like the one was committed on symonds not once, not twice but thrice....which is too much.....
yes KP...its a good suggestion...and nice way to move forward...
but the more pertinent question is whether ICC has inclination and guts to take these small but effective steps???
The solutions should be proper umpire rankings... and ones who are not performing should plainly be dropped... just like players, umpires do have lapses in form and therefore they also should be dropped accordingly.
Unfortunately, I am coming here after Golandaaz and Ottayan's blogs. They have taken the respective podiums in the debate.
This is a nice place to bring it all together.
I'll repeat my views here and join in -
There is one way to have the best of both. As you suggested, umpires on field must be empowered with a gadget enabling them to replay and refer to, themselves rather than a third umpire.
I'm sure plenty of such technology is available and nearly all stadia have giant screens these days where they could watch for themselves.
A third umpire and walkie-talkie could be a stand-by in case there is some glitch with the gadgetry.
This could allow the umpires to run a quick check themselves...like one does in a library, or on the request of the player for a review of his status, and most will be happier without the on-field umpires losing any powers to anyone. In fact they'd be stronger.
And such umpires without an interfereing ego, and healthy constitution, should be appointed, and monitored for continuance...but that's a job for the HR department of ICC.
hi SB
nice to see you here...its an excellent suggestion that umpired are allowed to reconsider their decisions by looking at same screens, players and spectators ridicule them by looking to...
You have been tagged, Pan. Tell us five unique things about yourself.
Oh, and btw, you're leaving your wrong e-mail on my blog.
hey dinnie
thanks!! i will check the email...
i have not looked myself that way...to tell you five unique things...
I agree with SP concern. In old days, there were no 3rd umpire or technology for close decision like run out, no ball, catch, boundry or sixes. Umpire always took decision with their own judgment or with the help of players. But now as technology broadly available to help umpires, why they are limiting it upto run outs or stumps only. Why they don't take help of the 3rd umpire for LBWs or catches.....They are misusing their position some times.... If the players can be penalised for wrong appeals, umpires should also be punished for their wrong decision or there must be some authority that can call the player back even physical umpire given him out.....
Keep it SP...
thanks SA...
one way or other we have to find solution to this growing menace i guess...
Post a Comment