With the previous Australia-India Test Series still ringing in our ears, and the current series underway in Bangalore, it was always just a matter of time before the age-old chestnuts of contentious catches and umpiring decisions once again came up in conversation. And that was before Virender Sehwag threw in his two cents last week.

And even in this first Test in Bangalore, it hasn’t taken long for it to become an issue again. This has got me thinking of course, and maybe there is a place in the modern game – where batsmen don’t trust fielders, and no-one trusts umpires – for available technology to be used in a way that will benefit the game.

Maybe some of this technology is what it’s cracked up to be?

Let me state up front, that on the whole, I’m a bit of a traditionalist when it comes to the game of cricket, especially Test cricket. I don’t mind the use of technology, but for me, it needs to be fool proof; there can’t be any margin for error or grounds for interpretation.

So, let’s just have a quick run through a few well-known uses of technology in the world of cricket these days, and see if there might be something out there worth pursuing.

Stump mikes and cameras: mikes have been around since the World Series Cricket days of course, when Kerry Packer wanted the game as far into people’s lounge rooms as possible. The mikes and stump cameras are now all very widely used, and are a generally accepted part of cricket coverage around the world. I can’t think of any real problems with either one, apart from the mikes making Warnie sound like a cameraman, but there’s no obvious benefit either. Commentary teams (and therefore viewers and listeners) get a clearer indication of noise around the stumps, but unless umpires are hearing that mike (which they have tried), there’s not much to be gained on the ground.

‘Snicko’: A Channel 9 favourite, and Mark Nicholas has really latched on since he arrived on our shores several years ago. Snicko is another invention that was really only made for the purposes of giving the viewer more information, and by default, the umpires more headaches.

There’s no denying it can easily tell the difference between the noise of ball hitting bat or pad, but because it’s almost always 3 or 4 balls behind the live action, it’s hard to see it being used more widely.

‘Hawkeye’: Rubbish, I can’t stand this worthless waste of time. For something that started out as such a good idea at first, it’s almost bordering on farcical how unbelievably inaccurate it’s become. The premise is good: predict the ball’s final trajectory past the batsman, based on speed, where it pitched, its line, swing and height. Fine. What we see now is something that has an uncanny knack of turning straight wide balls into late-swinging stump-hitting unplayables. And is it just me, or does Hawkeye just never miss, especially when Tony Greig’s in the chair?

The only good thing I can see for Hawkeye, is that the image projection of stumps behind a batsman being hit on the pads does at least assist telling where the ball pitched, and whether the batsman was hit in line. I can’t see much future for adoption by the 3rd umpire though, not while it’s as inaccurate at it still obviously is.

‘Hotspot’: This one’s the winner for me. Exact, instant, all the information you need to see (even as an umpire) is all there, quite literally, in black and white. Hotspot works on the fairly simple principle of infra-red, and therefore detecting heat in spots, most notably the impact of ball on bat, pad, body or stumps.

The fact that this piece of technology takes next to no time to process and replay, it would seem an obvious candidate for future use by the third umpire. ABC’s cricket commentators often mention that several Australian umpires have noted to them that Hotspot is the one innovation that could be advantageous, and it’s for all the reasons I mentioned: it’s exact and it’s instant. There’s no need for image projection, no need for alignment with audio, all the director needs to do is rewind and play.

It would be interesting to see it used for things other than ball hitting bat or pad, however. I wonder if the same technology couldn’t be used for close catches, such as Michael Clarke’s off Ganguly in Sydney last summer, or even the Ponting-Kumble caught-and-bowled in this current Test. Even bat-pad decisions could be made easier through the use of Hotspot. The only thing stopping it that I can think of would be how well heat is displayed on grass, and whether half-volleys could be picked up.

Either way, it’s hard to see why it couldn’t be used more widely. Hotspot would definitely have picked up whether Matthew Hayden hit pad or ball in his dismissal on the first morning, and it almost certainly would have shown if Rahul Dravid did or didn’t get an inside edge in his LBW decision on Saturday evening. Andrew Symonds’ bat too, would have shown the hottest of hotspots in last year’s Sydney Test.

It’s hard to see how it wouldn’t help.

Now I realise what plenty of you might be thinking, that how can I, a self-confessed traditionalist, be suddenly be pushing for greater use of technology? Well, to be honest, I don’t think the game in its most basic is changed through the third umpire using Hotspot. In fact if anything, it can only enhance the game, for both players and spectators, through the minimisation of errors, and the removal of “grey” areas of the game currently being over-scrutinised.

Australia-India series are now being likened to The Ashes in terms of rivalry, and the events of last summer – and even a few little things this weekend – have ensured that the scrutiny of players’ actions and umpires decisions will not decrease in the foreseeable future. So why not try and remove some of the subjective criticism through the use of technology that’s exact?

I know as a player that umpires are human, and that human element would and should always remain in the game in areas which will always be subjective. On the whole, good and bad decisions even themselves out (despite what I might mutter under my breath on the way back to the pavilion). But at the same time, viewers and spectators and especially players are entitled to accuracy and consistency when it comes to decisions being made. Especially when so much is at stake, in these days of sub continental billions promoting the game.

More than anything though, for Test cricket, any measure which would avoid the threats of teams going home mid-tour, or administrators deciding which umpires are or aren’t acceptable, should be pursued, especially if it might take some unwanted criticism away from umpires.

Follow Brett McKay on Twitter: @BMcSport

Enjoy sports? Enjoy a bargain? All Sports Online has your favourite sporting brands at up to 70% off. Online only, premium quality sporting goods and merchandise at discounted prices. Get a deal now.