When I started watching cricket as a kid, I came to know that whenever an umpire was asked a question for lbw, caught behind or a run-out, his decision to raise a finger or not would be a considered as the final decision.
When the decision was made to introduce the third-umpire for the first time in 1992, it was considered as a good move because giving run-outs was a tough challenge for on-field umpires. The review would give them another chance to confirm the decision.
The umpires would frequently use the third umpire review in the case of run-out appeals even though it was a clear run-out. The umpires didn’t want to take any risks and would directly point to the third umpire to make the decision, because such a decision is a crucial one and can change the match situation dramatically.
FOLLOW LIVE CRICKET SCORES OF DAY THREE BETWEEN AUSTRALIA AND INDIA
With the advent of the technology, umpires now also review if bowlers have bowled a no-ball after taking a wicket. The review system gives the batsman and the audience a clear view of whether the batsman is really out or not and they are assured by the decision after reviewing one.
The necessity to review arose because there have been many cases where poor decisions of on-field umpires turned out to be very costly for a batting side and umpires’ decisions were questioned by media and commentators.
Who can forget the infamous Sydney Test between India versus Australia in 2008 which was marred by a series of poor decisions made by Steve Bucknor?
I also clearly remember the India versus South Africa match in which AB de Villiers was clearly caught at slip, but was given not out by Aleem Dar. There are numerous such incidents, which raises the question whether umpires should review all the decisions or not.
An on-field umpire’s decision on caught behind and llbw cannot be unnoticed, because those decisions are considered based on what they see and hear and judged based on instincts and experience. A batsman’s reaction after lbw or a nick also plays a big part and I am sure umpires would also be considering this aspect while giving the decision.
The first Test match between India versus Australia in Adelaide also made news for the wrong reasons due to poor umpiring decisions. For example, Shikhar Dhawan was given out in the first innings when the ball clearly had hit his chest, but the umpire raised his finger. In the second innings, Ajinkya Rahane was given out even though the ball didn’t touch the bat or gloves.
In the second Test in Brisbane, Cheteshwar Pujara was given out caught behind when the ball didn’t nick the bat or glove, but had touched his visor, but alas umpire lifted the finger.
In such cases, why can’t the umpire review the decision by just watching a replay of the ball and then making the call? Is it so tough or hard to implement? If a run-out or a no-ball can be reviewed, why not a caught behind or a close catch appeal?
I am not going to the area whether DRS should be made compulsory or not because that’s an altogether different topic, but I fail to understand as to why ICC cannot implement rules to review the nicks or caught behinds if the on-field umpire thinks that it might be a 50-50 chance.
If the umpire is not 100 per cent sure whether the batsman has nicked the ball, then it’s better he review the appeal to confirm the decision. This way the umpire’s decision would not be controversial and matches would be in the news for the right reasons.
Geezer
Guest
Scrap the DRS system! The onus should not be put on the players to correct all the umpiring mistakes which are made. Careers are on the line and can easliy be wrecked by all the poor umpiring calls which we continue to see every cricket match. Who cares about speeding up the game? That is just rubbish! We want to see the correct umpiring decison made every time or at least some kind of believable consistency. How can an umpire not give an LBW which is shown to be hitting middle stump half way up? How can he give a bat/pad catch which is shown to have missed the bat by two feet? And yet we see this every match which is televised. The modern technology may not be 100% accurate. It may only be 95% accurate. But what ever degree of accuracy it is, it will be the same every time. Whereas umpires vary from 100% right to 100% wrong! The solution is easy. Scrap the DRS system. Just give the third umpire the power to intervene if , like the viewers, he sees that the wrong decision has been given. I dont care if it holds up the game. I get so frustrated when a player is given not out when he clearly should have been out and he then goes on to score 150. For me the game is totally wrecked from that point on. I cant see that it would even hold up the game that long anyway. We usually see the glaring mistake the field umpire has made within just a few seconds of it having been made courtesy of the action replay. We always see it long before the bowler has got back to his mark to bowl the next bowl. The recent matches between India and Australia couild have had a very different outcome if the Indians had not been on the receiving end of five or six or even more absolute howlers.And I dont support either Australia or India. I just want to see a fair result. Unfortunately the two matches I have just watched were decided by umpiring errors...and it shouldnt be like that. The quaint system we have where we have to abide by the umpires decision may have been OK when the game was just played by amateur players on the village green. But now it is a big money sport and peoples livelihoods are at stake. We dont have to tolerate that kind of amateur approach to umpiring these days because we have fantastic technology available which mostly helps to avoid human error and which mostly takes the emotion away from the decision. A player can scowl at the umpire if he gets a bad decision but he is not going to scowl at a machine! And while I am having a whinge, let's have some decent commentators as well! The current batch are just like listening to a bunch of Australian barrackers on the Hill. They are so one eyed that I often turn the sound off the TV and just watch the pictures. When are they going to find someone like Tony Greig who brought a bit of balance ?
Kev
Guest
No. If they do, then there's no point in having them out there at all. You may as well have a monkey sitting in a booth watching a TV screen. I already hate it when umpires send a run out decision to the third umpire while nodding that they are confident that the batsman was out. If you're confident they are out, then back yourself and make the call.
Darshan Kawar
Roar Pro
One or two decisions here and there would be fine slurpy, but what if there are number of decisions that went against batting team ? Would that be fair ?
Darshan Kawar
Roar Pro
Good point Rev Kev. If there's certain time limit to confirm the decision, it will definitely save match time.
Rellum
Roar Guru
That was a joke really. The BCCI are a cancer on the game.
Rob na Champassak
Roar Guru
+many
Rob na Champassak
Roar Guru
Don't praise the BCCI. They came to the right conclusion for all the wrong reasons. Inevitably their stance will eventually unwind.
Rellum
Roar Guru
Yes I love the fact the decision is done and dusted right there. Speeds up the game and increases the drama. Long reign the BCCI I say, at least when it comes the the DRS. Doggy decisions come and go for all so I don't care about the odd bad one.
slurpy
Roar Rookie
I'm actually enjoying this test series with no DRS. Bowler appeals, umpy makes a call and the game moves on. I don't even mind the occasional clanger as it adds to the tension of the series. Having said this i know i'm in the vast minority, and DRS is here to stay - so with that in mind I hope they don't take the NRL's philosophy of having every single decision checked.
Red Kev
Roar Guru
If you trained an umpire in the video control room it really wouldn't take that long, you could review nearly every dismissal within 60 seconds, 90 seconds for tough ones. As it is third-umpire replays take longer than that because the setup isn't operated competently.
Wayne
Roar Guru
People already complain DRS takes too long. Could you imagine if EVERY appeal had to be checked?