After a short delay Australia’s Phillip Hughes, left, walks back to the pavilion as Ricky Ponting, 2nd left, looks at umpires Billy Doctrove, 2nd right, and Rudi Koertzen on the fourth day of the second Ashes Test match between England and Australia at Lord’s cricket ground in London, Sunday, July 19, 2009. Hughes was caught out by Andrew Strauss off a ball from James Anderson for 17 runs. AP Photo/Tom Hevezi
Now we have Rudi Koertzen, rather bizarrely appointed to umpire in the third Ashes Test at Edgbaston, coming out with a blistering attack on modern players as cheats: “The players will stand there, nick a ball hard and wait for an umpire to make a decision. For me, that’s cheating,” he told Cricinfo.
For me, what this really reveals is that Koertzen is so lacking in confidence about his ability to make correct decisions that he wants the batsman to make the decision for him.
This misses the point about when a batsman makes a mistake entirely.
More often than not, the batsman does not have a clue what has happened, whether he nicked it or not. And it is really up to the umpire to make the correct decision.
Koertzen then goes on to explain that with the Nathan Hauritz catch, both he and umpire Doctrove lost sight of the ball when it lobbed in the air: “the next moment, when I looked around, all I saw were his hands going down. I just thought, ‘I’m not sure whether he caught it.’”
Doctrove, remarkably, missed the flight of the ball, too, and “because we were not sure,” Koertzen went to the video umpire.
For the Strauss catch: “I couldn’t see where the catch was taken because I had the bowler running down the wicket … I didn’t even know who was catching the ball at that stage.”
Koertzen then asked Doctrove whether it was a fair catch and he said, “Yes, it went straight in.”
So Koertzen did not go to the video umpire, despite the fact he had no inkling of whether it was a catch or not, and the other umpire was 40m away.
His savage attack on ‘cheating’ modern players suggests to me that he now thinks he might have been fooled by Strauss’ claiming of the catch that wasn’t.
I argued in an earlier post on this that Koertzen should have been dropped for his failure to adjudicate fairly on the matter of the Strauss ‘catch.’
His comments reinforce this opinion.
Now he seems to be recanting on his behaviour during the Lords Test, which justifies the case for his dropping.
But the ICC has resisted doing the right thing. Koertzen has been given the next Test, which raises the alarming question: Is he really up to umpiring a crucial Ashes Test?
On the evidence so far, the answer must be no.
JonnyP
Guest
Jimmy, this is an opinion site so if in your opinion Spiro appears to be whining then you tell him , and don't worry what these other precious souls think
Hansie
Guest
Koertzen is a shocking umpire. There is no doubt that the right team won the match, and that is what really matters, but how many big mistakes does Koertzen have to make before he is removed from the elite panel? He makes awful decisions in almost every match.
onside
Guest
Jimmy Many Australians are not carping about having lost.Despite a few dodgy decisions the opportunity to win slid through our fingers on a couple of occassions,at the very least the chance to have the series one all. The major concern is inconsistentcy. I for one would take no pleasure in winning a close Test match through a dreadful umpiring error,in particular if technology is available . The reference to the Strauss catch that wasnt does not reflect on Strauss,it reflects on the umpire.These things happen so quickly it is impossible to be certain.Thats why the technology is in place.
davido
Guest
Is this JUSTICE for Australia in that an umpire admits a player cheated us? What a massive admission... ! More so because it recognises that Australia is NOT always the perprator of injustices but is sometimes a victim. Really feel for the umpires. I dont mind them making a mistake but they need to use the available resources on a consistent basis. Trust died when money came into the game. As to cheating over the ages... I cant be sure but you hear lots of stories about the old days. Certainly money must put a lot of pressure on players. Rudi obviously feels he used to be able to trust the word of players. Maybe technology has revealed that the word of players cannot always be trusted.
Stoffy
Guest
Umpiring has quickly become one of the most scrutinized professions in today's society. The fact of the matter is Rudi has lost some credibility for his misjudgments in the second test. It's not to say he can not redeem himself, but in the back of every Australians mind will be the error plagued Rudi Koertzen. Jimmy, we are not patronizing the "respectable" Rudi Keortzen, merely this one instance in which yes he did make some fundamental mistakes. Like Spencer said, this is a opinion based site, so if you cannot respect how other people perceive some issues, i suggest you stop writing to this site. How about writing a piece yourself and let us be the judge, instead of accusing Spiro, a valued columnist, of for fitting all respect as a journalist.
Spencer
Guest
Jimmy - maybe you meant to say that Koertzen "was" one of the best umpires around? I would refer people to the reaction of the Indian cricket authorities when the erstwhile Steve Bucknor began his slide into retirement. Unfortunately the bell is tolling for Rudi, and like many players and umpires before him, he seems to be the last one to hear it. I wasn't aware that Spiro "lost"?? I thought that the Australian cricket team lost? BTW Jimmy, in case you aren’t aware, this is "the roar" and all these articles are opinion pieces, and don’t require balance or an unbiased view. So stop your whining about Spiro's one-sided views; just like you and me he is entitled to his opinion. Nonetheless I am sure he appreciates you “hit” on “the roar” which will help attract further betting agency advertisements.
Vinay Verma
Roar Guru
The point here is not about losing or winning but the competency of a match offical. The ICC Playing Handbook 2008-09 is specific about the responsibilites of a Match Offical....Pp 241 says ",,UMPIRES SHALL NOT MAKE ANY PUBLIC PRONOUNCEMENT WHICH IS DETRIMENTAL....(B) ....ANY PARTICULAR TOUR IN WHICH SUCH UMPIRE S INVOLVED...." It will be interesting to see what the ICC will do now? The Elite Panel has at least two Umpires beyond their use by date ...Rudi and Asokade Silva. De Silva stood in the 2008 SCG Tet and even though Australia won his umpiring was woeful A year later he is still on the Elite Panel. He gave decisions ,both against SA and Australia that were incorect. This is also not about disrespecting Rudi as a person. It is questioning his competency. He was a fantastic Umpire in the past. But if you stand in the spotlight you have to accept the brickbats with the bouquets.
Jimmy
Guest
Do stop whining. Koertzen is one of the best umpires around and the protocol does not allow him to refer to the TV umpire if his colleague is satisfied it was a catch. You lost. Get over it and do stop slagging off respected individuals (such as Fitzpatrick, Strauss, Koertzen).
JohnB
Guest
Have to disagree that batsmen often don't know when they've nicked a ball. They may well be unsure if it's been cleanly caught though, which would often justify a batsman standing his ground. Also, while consistency is a good thing, the principle that they operate under now is that they should make a decision on the field if they can. If neither saw the Hauritz catch clearly (and despite numerous comments, that the umpire was relatively close to the fielder there doesn't mean he necessarily had to be able to see the incident clearly), then it was appropriate to refer it, and if one of them thinks he did see the Strauss catch clearly, not referring it was the right decision. Given that it's very hard to believe that anyone could have seen the Strauss catch clearly from an umpire's position, seems to me that Doctrove is a lot more at fault here. I do remain puzzled that they had to refer the "catch" in slips off Ponting in the first innings, which very clearly carried, and not the Hughes/Strauss catch. It really has been a very poor 2 games umpiring-wise, with a number of howlers going each way.
Spiro Zavos
Expert
Another point i should have made is that if Koertzen wants batsmen to walk when they nick the ball, he shouldn't give them out caught when they don't nick the ball, a la Ponting in the Lords Test.
Vinay Verma
Roar Guru
Rudii is more Ancient than the Ancient Mariner. His punishent for his inadvertent comments should be a fine and suspension.He of all people should know better. He was respnsible for the ensuing fracas which now leaves him with an albatross around his neck.
drewster
Roar Pro
It seems a bit far fetched to be calling batsmen cheats! I mean it is his JOB after all to make decisions during a game, Whether they are right, wrong or indifferent. seems a case of excuses, excuses.