Here are few players which are in news because of their performance and here are some candid things about them.
Badrinath- Yeah he is very good technically. But I think he lacks hitting ability in the end. Sometimes he goes too slow for T-20.
Rayudu- Very good technically again. But not a good fielder in outfield. Wicketkeeps sometimes. Should be given a chance in Indian team.
Valthaty- Should not be selected just because of IPL
Varun Aaron and Umesh Yadav- Should be selected because they both have pace. They need a good bowling coach so that they become good fast bowlers for India.
Rohit Sharma- had been given enough chances. Should not be selected.
Parmeshwaran- He has got height. Enough pace. Sometimes ball swings. He also should be given a chance but not sure whether he will be selected.
Irfan Pathan- He has neither pace. Ball also not swinging as he was doing in his initial phase. He should be dropped permanently
I totally agree with friend vikasakavi views.His cricketing brains have suggested nice options . The latest decision of ICC 's rule making committee should not interfere with the ground umpire's decisions in TESTS & ODI's- a tradition dating back to decades.
Re: Tests & ODI's needs ground umpires decisions !!!
by Against Pseudos on May 13, 2011 12:04 PM
Khalid Rauf:
How about another tradition dating back to centuries - that of no appealing?
Bowlers should forthwith stop appealing; because as per the tradition dating back to centuries the umpires gave the batsman out based on their decision. Not on a particular bowlers whim or fancy...
The legend of the Dark Lord gets more meat after his death.
A Pakistani paper, which calls itself the Pakistan Observer has published this report today. We quote:
Information collected from various sources and pieced together gives altogether a different turn to the Abbottabad episode and this scribe now tends to believe that the slain Osama bin Laden was captured and killed some years ago by the US forces and was brought in a coffin to Abbottabad on the night between May Ist and 2nd and "killed.'
Some reports suggest that the body of the dead Osama was lying in a morgue specially erected by US Army in a small safe house at the Bagram Air Base, Afghanistan for the last few years and as per CIA's plan, he was now "captured' from a place inside Pakistan and "killed' at the "appropriate time'.
The body of frozen Osama was brought to Abbottabad by a helicopter under the most sophisticated and hi-tech operation and taken to the upper storey of the building. A commando immediately sprayed a blood-like solution at his face to establish that the leader of Al-Qaeda was killed on the spot.
Though it is an official system, an appeal does dent the image, prestige and self-respect of the umpire, if his decision is to be reversed.
So ICC should withdraw the DRS and instead, umpires should be instructed to seek help of the third (TV) umpire on their own, if they have the slightest doubt.
Examples of such situations are:
1. LBW 2. Run out 3. Stumping 4. Whether a catch was taken cleanly 5. Was there an edge from the bat when a catch is claimed and is taken cleanly? 6. If there was a sound heard by the umpire, was it by the ball brushing the bat or gloves or was it because the bat hit the turf? 7. Bat and pad catches 8. No balls (I really do not understand how an umpire standing behind the crease can really assess a no ball accurately!)
According to statistics of the recent ODI WC 2011, only about 20 percent of all umpiring decisions had to be reversed. Yet, when the technology is available and when the career of a player is at stake sometimes, or when a particular decision has a profound effect on the possible result of the match, there is nothing wrong in umpires taking external / technologicial help.
Re: Suggestion
by Against Pseudos on May 13, 2011 11:59 AM
Vikadakavi:
Good point. Similarly the "Appealing" system should be done away with, as the Point number 9. on your list.
A bowler has no right to "appeal" if the umpire doesn't feel like giving someone out. If the batsman is out, the Umpire surely will give him out without denting his image, prestige and self-respect.
By the way, your point number 8. quite amusing, because Umpires have been for the last 200 years assessing a no ball standing precisely behind the crease...
For your point 2. and 3. - the umpires already utilise the TV umpire for all those decisions; even the one where the batsman is clearly out or clearly not out - just to be on the safe side...
Re: Suggestion
by Shahaji Nair on May 12, 2011 06:13 PM
V True, dude. It is a very embarrasing situation when decisions given by umpires are proven incorrect on reviewing the replay on TV. There are indeed pros and cons of TV umpire referals, but still ICC should not limit DRS in the interest of the game, if they are not interested to continue with 3rd umpire, which in turn is a very good resource
Re: Suggestion
by sunil nair on May 12, 2011 07:28 PM
It may be embarrasing , but the DRS does reduce the number of mistakes . When we talk about only 20% of decisions being reversed , remember that many of the referrals were actually strategic ones ; where the batsmen knew that they were most probably out but because their wicket was valuable , they tried a referral anyway . Besides many referrals were wasted because the captain had a referral remaining towards the end of the innings and decided to ask for one just to use up his chance . A better statistic would be finding out how many wrong decisions were reversed through DRS . According to ICC nearly 95 % of such mistakes were corrected . At the end of the day , whats important is that the match should have been held as fairly as possible . Umpire ego should not be a criteria . I use the word Ego since a good umpire would not only strive to make correct decisions but would also gladly accept any mistake he makes and strive not to repeat it .
Though it is an official system, an appeal does dent the image, prestige and self-respect of the umpire, if his decision is to be reversed.
So ICC should withdraw the DRS and instead, umpires should be instructed to seek help of the third (TV) umpire on their own, if they have the slightest doubt.
Examples of such situations are:
1. LBW 2. Run out 3. Stumping 4. Whether a catch was taken cleanly 5. Was there an edge from the bat when a catch is claimed and is taken cleanly? 6. If there was a sound heard by the umpire, was it by the ball brushing the bat or gloves or was it because the bat hit the turf? 7. Bat and pad catches 8. No balls (I really do not understand how an umpire standing behind the crease can really assess a no ball accurately!)
According to statistics of the recent ODI WC 2011, only about 20 percent of all umpiring decisions had to be reversed. Yet, when the technology is available and when the career of a player is at stake sometimes, or when a particular decision has a profound effect on the possible result of the match, there is nothing wrong in umpires taking external / technologicial help.
Re: Suggestion
by SK on May 12, 2011 06:10 PM
Good suggestion. An umpire should be the final decision maker for the match, and can consult with third umpire. Otherwise his position is meaningless.
Imagine soccer having the DRS and players allowed to call for it for fouls, award of freekicks, penalties, and even questioning the legitimacy of the goal.
This kind of tech interventions rob the game of its thril.
Re: Re: Suggestion
by Against Pseudos on May 13, 2011 12:05 PM
SK:
;-)... Good point. The 3rd umpire should be done away with and the ruling of the on-ground umpire on all stumping and runout decisions should be final...
Unhappy side may appeal in any High Court in India. If unhappy with HC go to SC. If still unhappy file revision petition. Still not happy meet President of India to reverse the decision.
Re: DRS 2050
by vikadakavi on May 12, 2011 06:02 PM
Even if the match is say, between Australia and South Africa, played in England, they should appeal in Indian courts?
Only one appeal is not enough. So many times both captains & on field unpires have proved with their calls. In such a case limiting the appeal to one is not at all justifiable
Re: NO OF APPEALS
by venkateswaran venkateswaran on May 12, 2011 05:41 PM
Only one appeal is not enough. So many times both captains & on field unpires have been proved wrong with their calls. In such a case limiting the appeal to one is not at all justifiable
