Who said umpires have to always be serious?
Anyone can contribute to The Roar and have their work featured alongside some of Australia’s most prominent sports journalists.
Every cricket fan seems to have his/her own opinions on rules of the game of cricket.
We’ve all got suggestions to modify some prevailing rulings, get rid of of certain absurd rules or even bringing some new and refreshing ideas, all with the intention of bringing betterment to the game of cricket.
There are a number of aspects where the rules of the game need to be improved. My personal frustrations are with the DRS and how technology is being used particularly when you finally had decided to bring technology into the game.
DRS was introduced to get rid of the ‘howler’, i.e. the umpire mistake which was so obvious that it had a detrimental impact on the game. This was the sole reason to bring DRS into the game and it is something we have not achieved.
Firstly the current DRS is prone to exploitation, particularly with the new ‘review retention’ change when it is an umpire’s call decision.
It can potentially waste a lot of time during a game as the teams are free to review on every delivery as long as they are succeeding to retain the lifeline.
Secondly there has been an obvious absurdity since its introduction due to the umpire’s call rule.
Imagine a youngster from a non-cricketing nation newly introduced to cricket sees the ball hitting the stumps on hawk-eye but astonishingly batsman is given not out. That will clearly add to confusion and contradiction.
Lastly DRS had to eliminate each and every howler from the umpires – but it is not the case always. It is not uncommon when to see a big howler uncorrected because a teammate has already used up the available life line.
So the guy who needed justice big time gets sacrificed due to the selfishness of his own teammate who happened to have unproductively used up the review earlier in the match. This is where the original motto of introducing DRS gets compromised.
Relieve the on-field umpire from watching no balls. Let him concentrate on the other end only, there is an umpire who sits idle throughout the match in front of the TV, let him watch no balls.
You don’t need to stop the game, you can call a no ball after one more delivery perhaps, it should be affordable to play free hit balls slightly delayed as soon as a no ball is confirmed.
If the batsman gets out then obviously no ball will be checked there and then.
When a batsman is dismissed the third umpire needs to get busy. Batsmen should be made to walk slowly towards their dressing room as a rule.
Before he reaches the pavilion a third umpire checks the no ball, edges, ball tracking, impact etc and therefore if he finds a fault with the decision he can call the batsman back.
It is better if a batsman who doesn’t deserve to still be there plays few more balls before being removed than him playing a game-changing knock on his second life which is a real injustice to the bowler and the fielding team. I
This alternative is essentially supposed for decisions relating to batters only. I suggest providing every pro player in the world some sort of a wild card, a lifetime wild card with two lives, which he can use anywhere from domestic T20 leagues, international T20s, ODIs, first class cricket to Test match cricket.
It should be a non renewable card which means once you have used up both of your allotted life lines that’s it, they are spent for ever.
This will be useful against howlers especially when you were unable to correct howlers due to your teammates having had used up the available lifelines unnecessarily and carelessly.