Unbiased decision is what is required. If technology can help to give it, then what’s wrong with that? But in the era of match fixing, if the 3rd umpire is getting a special effect video then what will happen to cricket?
It is funny that that the third umpire , with the benefit of technology, can make as many as 2 mistakes 9 in fact, I think it was 3 wrong decisions - as Tendulkar's decision was debatable) out of 11. I think ICC needs to act in improving the selection process of umpires. I can understand the element of benefit of doubt in Dilshan's case but why was the same benefit not applied to Sehwag and Tendulkar. ICC has consistently persisted with a group of extremely incompetent and mediocre umpires over the last several years. This includes darrel Hair, Rudi Koertzen, Steve Bucknor, Mark Benson etc. Why is it that the cricketing fraternity is not questioning this ? It is equally amazing that no Indian umpire features in the ICC panel. There are several million umpires in India who are far better than those in ICC panel. Is this why the majority of wrong decisions are against India ? Do not forget that, a few months ago, the umpires ensured that an Indian victory at Sydney was turned into defeat with about 33 wrong decisions in one match. To take attention away from the facts, Aussies made a patently fabricated charge against Bhajji. It was Mike Proctor alone who believed the charge. The independent ICC commissioner found Symonds guilty of fabricating the whole exercise. Why was no action taken against Symonds or Ponting or Hayden or the match refree or the three umpires ? In the spirit of the game, all should have been baned. Shame on icc and BCCi. They are destroying the cricket.
RE:Come on - it is just a game
by Ramelton Pandya on Jul 30, 2008 06:38 PM
Do you wnat your child's cricekt career to be over because of a wrong decision? Baat karte hai!!!!
Mr.Rajneesh,than q for the accurate analysis on the referral system.
1. Would all the batsmen have enough time to change their minds after hearing the no-ball call from the umpire? Just because the batsman may or may not change his mind, the bowler cannot be done injustice on account of umpire's mistake! If the bowler feels he has bowled a right ball, the review MUST be made...after all he too is part of the team to make use of the technology.
2. How can the referral system be complete without the usage of a snickometer for an edge or caught behind appeal?
I feel technology acted as 'artificial intelligence' that has its own limitation. This time India was done in and may soon happen to any other team on a bad day!
Mr.Rajneesh,than q for the accurate analysis on the referral system.
1. Would all the batsmen have enough time to change their minds after hearing the no-ball call from the umpire? Just because the batsman may or may not change his mind, the bowler cannot be done injustice due to umpire's mistake! If the bowler feels he has bowled a right ball, the review MUST be made...after all he too is part of the team to make use of the technology.
2. How can the referral system be complete without the usage of a snickometer for an edge or caught behind appeal?
I feel technology acted as 'artificial intelligence' that has its own limitation. This time India was done in and may soon happen to any other team a bad day!
While Zaheer may have not bowled a no ball as replays seem to suggest, it would be unfair to the batsman to then rule him out based on the review since when a batsmen hears the no-ball call he can change his shot to get maximum runs off that particular delivery. If you look carefully at the shot offered by Warnapura you will notice this. Outs on no ball calls should not be reviewed for this singular reason.
Shewag's out seems not so clear cut as is made out to be but he would have got himself out sooner rather than later anyway. Seems to me the writer has written with a certain bias. If it seemed to be going to hit the top of the stumps then its out as in the case of Ganguly and Mendis. On the whole it was good to have it since it reduced toe amount of mistakes though it did not completely erase them. India just didnt learn to use it properly. For that the Captain must be able to trust the bowler and keeper who know best in these situations. Seems Kumble needs to have a chat to Bhajji.
RE:Warnapura out off a no Ball
by vinay on Jul 30, 2008 10:39 AM
true. kumble wasted the ind chances for referrals. kumble asked for 3rd ump intervention where even bhajji appealled casually.
RE:Warnapura out off a no Ball
by Ambal Jayaraman on Jul 29, 2008 10:55 PM
Calling a noball after the batsman has played would be better than not referring simple noball call errors from umpires. The use of free hits like in T20 could be used in tests too to penalize the bowler for the noball. This would allow use of reviews for any wrong noball calls from umpire.
RE:Give out wrong decisions
by cattamanchi chaitanya on Jul 29, 2008 11:07 PM
Have some respect for this people yar ..Or u will end up scolding ur dad and mam after they get old
he referred to the 2 lbw decisions which were rubbish to b referred to 3rd ump. even bhajji didnt appeal seriusly for the lbw which ump turned down obviously. kumble lost precious 2 tries this way.
Mr. Rajneesh has provided us the perfect data which requires to be seen by the ICC that the even the technology can make mistake after it is been handled by an individual.
RE:Test Match Referral system.
by Shakti on Jul 29, 2008 05:03 PM
Yeah but just see how many times the field empire have guessed it wrong.. more than 3-4 times, so overall the percentage of correct decisions have improved..
