King Posted February 9, 2008 Posted February 9, 2008 I’m surprised there’s been not a statement made in the cricket media about the 3rd umpire decisions that’s been trialled in NZ domestic Twenty20. All decisions including LBWs, catches or any dismissals given by the field umpires can be contested upon by the fielding or the batting team. There is a limit of course. The team contesting if gets the contested decision right they can continue to contest as many times as they want as long as they don’t get 2 contested decisions proving otherwise. What this has done is avoid contests of marginal or fairly decent decision by both the sides. If the contesting side gets two contested decisions not going their way they will lose out their chances to contest. This now ensures there is no major loss of time but the terrible decisions are avoided. The umpires feel a lot more confident now as they know if they make terrible mistakes they will be contested. So far this referral system has worked quite well. There has been times when the fielding captain hasn’t contested a marginal decision for instance when the batsman was ruled not out to a LBW. The keeper when consulted upon seems to indicate to the captain the ball was pitching outside the line and was missing the stump. Now the keepers are the best judge apart from the umpires and if they know when to contest and when not to you start seeing way better decisions made and also avoids ridiculous appeals from behind stumps that puts so much pressure on the on field umpires. I quite like this system and am disappointed this didn’t make headlines in any of cricket related media or websites. ICC could do well to borrow this referral system and improve umpiring standards.
Mr. Wicket Posted February 9, 2008 Posted February 9, 2008 Silly system. It causes the game to lose some of its charm and randomness.
MundaPakistani Posted February 9, 2008 Posted February 9, 2008 Few weeks ago(perhaps during the Sydeny tests) I read on cricinfo that they tried a similar thing in ENG but it failed(not sure why it failed).
King Posted February 9, 2008 Author Posted February 9, 2008 Silly system. It causes the game to lose some of its charm and randomness. :D
msb1991 Posted February 9, 2008 Posted February 9, 2008 Few weeks ago(perhaps during the Sydeny tests) I read on cricinfo that they tried a similar thing in ENG but it failed(not sure why it failed). It failed because the rule was that basically, the umpire had to have made an abomination of an error and this never happened, and so people stopped using them.
Sachinism Posted February 9, 2008 Posted February 9, 2008 Silly system. It causes the game to lose some of its charm and randomness. after what happened in Sydney, i wouldnt mind if the game lost some of its charm and randomness when you're screwed out of victory in a game where nobody expected you to win, it sucks
sm332 Posted February 9, 2008 Posted February 9, 2008 after what happened in Sydney, i wouldnt mind if the game lost some of its charm and randomness when you're screwed out of victory in a game where nobody expected you to win, it sucks I assure that Salil was being very very sarcastic
Cricketics Posted February 9, 2008 Posted February 9, 2008 Silly system. It causes the game to lose some of its charm and randomness. @ the same time it can be more heart breaking..in other wordz can become bit more interesting like seeing "umpire decision pending"on the giant screen and then decision comez "out:two_thumbs_up: crowd stunned..
Rajiv Posted February 9, 2008 Posted February 9, 2008 @ the same time it can be more heart breaking..in other wordz can become bit more interesting like seeing "umpire decision pending"on the giant screen and then decision comez "out:two_thumbs_up: crowd stunned.. ..too much stunning can bore them
Cricketics Posted February 10, 2008 Posted February 10, 2008 ^offcourse going everything to third umpire can be a bit boring..
Inside_edge Posted February 10, 2008 Posted February 10, 2008 So the guyz need to be judicious while contesting.You'll be left to rue for obvious ones not goin yr way if you let two bad challenges in a row max you out. Folks like Bucknor can wait..
fineleg Posted February 10, 2008 Posted February 10, 2008 Silly system. It causes the game to lose some of its charm and randomness. :hysterical: hope this system is continued thru to Test cricket:two_thumbs_up:
panesarv Posted February 10, 2008 Posted February 10, 2008 I think it should be given a chance in International Cricket. If it doesn't work then just take it off.
Guest BossBhai Posted February 10, 2008 Posted February 10, 2008 -- Removed on request of the user --
Tapioca Posted February 10, 2008 Posted February 10, 2008 So the guyz need to be judicious while contesting.You'll be left to rue for obvious ones not goin yr way if you let two bad challenges in a row max you out. Folks like Bucknor can wait.. I am waiting for teams to game this system. The fielding team will stand around till someone in the pavilion sees the replay and signal whether to refer.
Guest BossBhai Posted February 10, 2008 Posted February 10, 2008 -- Removed on request of the user --
King Posted February 10, 2008 Author Posted February 10, 2008 It's been a good success the referral system in NZ domestic cricket. There has been no over referrals and the umpires seems to have been quite relieved by the new system. I think they should use this in international cricket ASAP.
Anakin Posted February 10, 2008 Posted February 10, 2008 Silly system. It causes the game to lose some of its charm and randomness. :hysterical::hysterical::giggle:
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now