The Australians, the Englishmen and the South Africans always get away with all their antics. It is only the Indians, Pakistanis and to some extend, the Sri Lankans who are always at the receiving end of the Match Referee's punishments. This is happening because the Boards of these countries have no say in ICC.
One is tempted to compare Umpires, Match Referees, and non-player cricket officials to the "powerful tribe" described in the following Ambrose Bierce's definition in his Devil's Dictionary: "Idiot: A member of a large and powerful tribe whose influence in human affairs has always been dominant and controlling. The idiot's activity is not confined to any special field of thought or action, but "pervades and regulates the whole". He has the last word in everything; his decision is unappealable. He sets the fashions of opinion and taste, dictates the limitations of speech and circumscribes conduct with a dead-line."
After reading the article it appears that only we are getting wrong decisions when we go to Australia. What about when Australia tours India ? Remember Harbanjan's Hartrick .. Was Gilkrist Out ? Umpries all over the world are humans. So they will make mistakes. The best of the recent decision was that the umpire was not Australian but WestIndian.
RE:Umpires
by Srinath on Dec 10, 2003 12:23 AM
You never know Steve Bucknor may be influenced by the Sachin - Lara duel & wanted to give Lara some time to get going as they are taking on SouthAfrica now.
As for the decisions against the aussies in India , I do agree that umpires do make mistakes but what steve bucknor did & what daryl harper did was beyond belief & moreover the media ( aussie commentators ) didn't say a word also about gilchrist's wrong decission if it really was why ??? whereas the same media still remembers the incidence of 4 years ago clearly why ??? it is because of the magnanimity of the bad decision made then.
RE:Umpires
by venkat on Dec 09, 2003 06:21 PM
It's not only the issue of whether indian bats man are out or not, there are the other case like "Ricky Ponting abused fast bowler Javagal Srinath in full view of the spectators and the TV cameras during the Boxing Day Test in that 1999-2000 series" and "Slater was seen arguing with the umpire and Dravid. The third umpire had ruled Dravid not out after Slater had dived forward at mid-wicket to take a catch" The decisions can be taken in this cases after looking at the replays, so whey in these cases justice is not done. Can you answer these?
This was a very well covered and detailed article. Most often than the aussies escape with the kind of things they do on the field. I hope it (this article) also gets reviewed by other people belonging to icc
Our Indian Cricket team media Managers and Commentators and sports journalists should take the incidents to task outside the cricket field and Make an ISSUE of IT, since the ICC only favours WHITE cricketers like australians and Southafricans.Look at alan donlad spitting when rahul dravid was batting , no fine was given to him. WHY???? THere has always been injustice done to indians throughout the WORLD. LET US remove the MENTALBLOCK from our mind OF BRITISH RAJ and believe in ourselves. IF someone gives us ONE SLAP we should give him 20 SLAPS , this is the 21 century.
Ausyralian may be the best side as the world MEDIA cliam but they will certainly not become a great side such as Garry Sobbers's windies. Winning by Hook or Crook is not what people appriciate. every one knows that their is a difference in being aggresaive and being rude and arrogant. And I totlay blame Media for this hype created arround a lot which in my and I am sure many people's opinion is yet to prove many a thing off the filed.
I hold no brief for the Aussie sledging or their cheating. But, just a couple of issues in perspective:
Sunil Gavaskar has never been a good sport. In that infamous Melbourne incident, he thought he had been wronged. Replays suggested that it was pad bat (you can be given out lbw for pad bat) and not bat pad. Whatever Lillee might have said or not said or unsaid, does it give Gavaskar the right to concede a Test Match? Ironically, thanks to the lion hearted bowling of Kapil Dev, we won that match something which Gavaskar wanted to lose for his personal reasons. Remember his statement: Smoke was coming out of my ears. A poor and dour accumulator of runs and a poorer sport, the world of cricket has not seen till date. (Incidentally, Gavaskar scored century in both innings of the Karachi 1978 Test though he was clearly caught behind in the first over in both innings Any Indian scribe remembers that?)
On the shoulder before wicket. By focussing on where the ball hit Tendulkar, the media is trying to deflect the issue and not see whether or not there was merit in the verdict. It might have gone over the stumps and, if so, it is for that reason that he should not have been given out and not for the reason of having been hit on the shoulder. The overriding question before the umpire would the ball always have hit the wicket?. If the answer to this question is yes, then, it does not matter as to where the batsman was struck. Because batsmen are struck more often on their legs in trying to defend, drive or flick, it is called Leg Before Wicket. Otherwise, there is nothing sacrosanct about the point of impact of the ball being on the legs only to be declared out LBW.
RE:Umpiring Decisions in Australia
by Raghu on Dec 10, 2003 03:55 AM
I actually concur with Mr. Parthasarathy on the issue of Sachin's dismissal during the last Aussie tour. Sachin received three dismissals against him in 6 innings during that tour of which two were against McGrath and one against Warne. And your guess is right - all of them were lbw decisions. The beauty of sport is such that each one has a human factor to it that leaves us all debating. I really feel that it would be inviting boredom if we have to automate such decisions. Anyway, getting back to the decision in question, I really think that though the ball was pitched short, it did not get the kind of "rise" that the batsman (or bowler) anticipated and it turned out to be a dolly. But Sachin had already ducked and the ball struck him on his shoulder. I clearly remember that the trajectory of the ball was not on the rise but it was coming down. However, I need to add that from watching the TV replays I was not sure of the line of the ball. Being an India fan and a Sachin fan, it was not easy to digest but then if we are bad losers ourselves, we cannot blame the Aussies! But I strongly feel that the other dismissals that he was handed in that tour were not out.
RE:Umpiring Decisions in Australia
by Prabhu Rangarajan on Dec 09, 2003 11:33 PM
Mr. Parthasarathy, Shuja Butt was the umpire who turned down the appeal by Sarfraz Nawaz when Gavaskar was yet to score in the 2nd knock against Pakistan. He was actually setting right an earlier mistake!
RE:Parthasaradhi
by Venkat on Dec 09, 2003 05:54 PM
Hai, OK you are a approved umpire, we do agree. But I didn't understand why did you mentioned only these 2 cases which are against India, but you didn't say atleast a word against any other cases mentioned in this article. There is a word about Indian umpires "If there is any issue like a batsman may be out on a chance of 40% you will give out if India is batting (Though 60% he is not out or you are not sure)thinking if you don't give out you feel what other country will think about you. So you sacrify our side, and if the bats man is from other country you will not give out.
RE:Umpiring Decisions in Australia
by Madhusudhan on Dec 09, 2003 03:41 PM
Mr. Parthasarathy,
On both counts you have to get your facts straight. Gavaskar has mentioned repeatedly that he regrets his hasty action of calling Chauhan away, but it was because Lillee made personal abuses and not that he was reacting to the umpire's decision. He was wrong and he has accpted it publicly many a time. So why are you questioning it now? Just because he made one mistake in his illustrious career, you want to throw a load of muck at him and question his right to comment now? Tell me how many people 'walk' now? Brian Lara is the only one. In the end, as they say, it all evens out, unless its a 13 man game like the previous Aussie team in 2000? Its the concerted effort by team, media, fans to rub slime over the opposition that leaves a lousy taste in the mouth when a team visits Aussie land. No other country behaves thus.
About Tendulkar's LBW, I think all persons who understand cricket know what LBW means. Here the contention is that the ball was clearly rising and would have gone high above the stumps. Even the Aussie media agreed that Sachin was done in by these dubious decision(s) in the last tour. Bucknor has added ghee to the fire now, with his "error".
They are big and tough, no doubt, but most of them have the maturity of a 15 year old. Added to that you have the incompetent 'brown-sahib' umpires like Madugalle, who want to outdo the 'white' umpires in their 'fairness'.
Ganguly and team have to just hold their heads up and stick to the cricket. Tendulkar's reaction to Bucknor's incompetent decision in the last test showed what a perfect gentleman he is and a great role-model. Wish the Aussies would learn from him.
On another angle, they talk big of one Gilchrist incident, but Indians have been doing this for ages. Remember Vishy recalling the batsman when wrongly given out? India lost the test, but gained in stature. Similarly, Laxman promptly indicating to the umpire that he had not caught the ball in the recent series, resulted in Umpire Shepherd applauding him.
Keep up the honourable behaviour, Indian players. That is more important than winning by unfair means.
