Dear Sir, As we all know, wht happened during the play in Day3..Sachin was given out for no mistake of his. Steve Bucknor has the experience to judge easily whether he has nicked the ball or not..Moreover even the bowler Razzaq was not sure of the appeal and he just appealed for namesake.Even when we can excuse Bucknor for his mistake..but the wicketkeeper wud have clearly realised tht it was not a caught - behind..he shd hav confronted his captain or the umpire and shd have called Sachin to bat, which wud have been more of a sportsmanship..In these aspects the Australian team definitely deserves a credit..coz they have done it several times..Not only they are the best team in sports but also in sportsmanship. with regards, Saandeep.M
Buckner is the one who has always been unfair to India and specialy against Sachin...if we see his record, it clearly show that the man is fanatioccaly against anti india by not giving a clear dismissal in favor and by giving decision like sachin on day 3 in favor of oposition...
Dear Sir, Everybody is in praise of Bucknor for his achievement of 100 tests. But what about his standard of umpiring for last 4-5 years. Its not the numbers that matters, but the quality. Also, he is very negative in his approach towards the indian team. Yesterday, he gave Sachin out. But nobody, except the bowler had appealed for it. More than that, if he thinks the ball is edged by the batsman, the keeper would have heard it and so he is sure to appeal for that. On the other hand, if its a small nick, how such a big deviation occurs? Its all commonsense. Cricket is a game of eye-hand co-ordination - not only for batman, but to the umpires also. So better for the ICC to avoid umpires with such drawbacks. Here is the greatness of Dickie Bird and also to some extent that of Venkataraghavan lies, because poor decisions can damage the confidence of the player. Moreoever we are using electronic for other decisions, but why not here if the umpire is in doubt? Hope for the best in the furture
