From Vipul Gupta, India
The ICC deserves to be lauded for taking a step in the right direction with the Request Review system but still I feel that there is a lot of fine tuning that remains to be done.
The genesis for the Request Review system can be traced to the fractious India v Australia series in Australia at the end of 2007 when several umpiring errors went against only one side i.e. India. If it is observed closely than most of the howlers were concerned with thick edges that everyone except the umpire in question did not see or hear. Indians can justifiably feel aggrieved after the just concluded Indo v Lanka series that they were at the receiving end of some rough decisions. But this time the majority of the decisions concerned LBWs.
LBWs by their very nature are very subjective and differ from person to person. Both Sehwag and Dravid were adjudged out LBW at critical junctures in the series when many people would have felt that the decisions were very harsh. On the other hand the Lankan batsmen really benefited a lot most notably T. Samaraweera when in the 3rd Test in the first innings he was out plumb to a skidder from Kumble but the decision was overturned in the batsman's favour. In fact Sachin was caught on TV gesturing to his mates on the field from the pavilion that the batsman was out.
The benefit of doubt is always given to a batsman but in the recent series it was observed that the umpires preferred to err on the bowler's side and gave the batsman out and then wait for the third umpire to over rule him. Even a big stride forward was not safe anymore. If batsmen of the caliber of Dravid and Sachin are given out in such fashion than I do not think there would be many Test Matches that would last longer than 2-3 days. That is the reason why I advocate that the LBW decision should be kept out of the purview of the Request review system.
By all means in cases where there is sufficient room for doubt about an inside edge on to the pads than it can be referred to the man upstairs but on the whole I would prefer the on field umpire to take the call on whether the ball was pitched in line and whether or not it would have gone on to hit the stumps. Now it is clear that even the best of technology cannot guarantee 100 % error free decisions. And please do not forget that even incorrect umpiring decisions are very much a part of the charm of the game.
As an ex fast bowler, I am disgusted with the way this great game is going. I am not a fan of technology in cricket. I have seen many batsman saved during a third umpire review because there was insuffient evidence to give them out.
Batsman loiter around the crease after driving one to the slips purely because the camera may not show the ball hitting the catcher's hands first.
It's a farce. India always rattle the cage about the last test series here in Australia (officated by neutral umpires) - how about the years of complaints from sides touring India about the standard of umpiring there? How about India provide some world class umpires for the ICC to appoint?
More money and time should be pumped from the ICC to develop and encourage and train top class umpires. Offer them better travel, better pay, better conditions (I especially like the idea of four rotating umpires per match) and watch your umpiring standards improve.
Humans should police cricket not computers
"LBWs by their very nature are very subjective and differ from person to person." There's nothing subjective about pitching in line, hitting in line, pitching outside leg, or an inside edge! They are either true or false, and it is these questions which a review can answer (note I'm not including whether it's hitting in the list, as there is no foolproof way of answering this).
RSS Feed
