Let's get some former umpires in the commentary box

I don’t know what it’s like to be an international umpire, especially today, with technology having a far greater role than at any time in the history of umpiring. With that in mind, is it time for a former umpire’s voice on the commentary panel?

Whatever you think of Shane Warne’s commentary, if a spinner’s on, chances are that he’ll answer the questions you have about what the bowler’s doing.

For obvious reasons, he is Channel Nine’s voice on spin bowling. He can tell you what it’s like to be treated as an afterthought by your captain, or why it’s so difficult to bowl only after the quicks have failed to get the breakthrough.

Other commentators can, but if in doubt, they naturally defer to Warne.

Everyone feels qualified to have an opinion on umpiring. Frankly, they should. Cricket needs opinions and different points of view lead to the progression of umpiring.

Marketing gimmicks help too: the zing bails should be used for every match because of how they make adjudicating run outs and stumpings easier.

Yet cricket also needs authoritative voices on umpiring, and commentary panels lack umpires. It is understandable, because umpires aren’t names in the same way former players are. The problem of recognition is enhanced by umpires having to mostly officiate overseas due to the need to be seen as impartial.

I don’t know what it’s like to play a Test away from home. A Test player, or a former Test player, can tell me that. I don’t know what it’s like to have to play your home Tests away from home. A Pakistan player can tell me that. What voice on a commentary panel can tell me what it’s like to be unable to officiate on the field in a Test involving the country of your birth?

And who can tell me about the importance of the square-leg umpire in the modern game, where most decisions that are within the purview of the square-leg umpire are sent up to the third umpire? What sort of communication goes on between the umpires in a match that is different from a match with no technology?

We already have a better idea of that last question through access to the third umpire’s voice when looking through a review, although that is but a mere snapshot.

I’m not calling for more access to umpires as they do their job – more access to players hasn’t necessarily equated to more insights. I’m suggesting more access to those who can better explain the evolving tradecraft of modern umpiring.