Is there a NEED for NEUTRAL 3RD Umpires Too?

[Laaloo]

Guys After seeing the indias tour of australia, i am still not satisfied with the umpiring. As you have seen, in the sydney test, symonds was not given out stumping when even we saw that he was out. But the 3rd umpire (AUSSIE HIMSELF brucen oxford) gave him not out. In the 2nd finals of the CB series, when hussey was clearly out, the umpire spent at least 5 minutes to look for nicks and edged. I mean how the hell can u find nick and edges on that. Even the channel 9 commentators were upset. So my question is , is there a need for NEUTRAL 3rd umpires too?

[panesarv]

yes

[fineleg]

Yes.

[Holysmoke]

Yez.

[Mr. Wicket]

No, and there is no need for a third umpire either. It detracts from the charm and randomness of the game. Leave it to the umpires on field. :D

[flamy]

also, if a 100% wrong decision is given with proof showing it is a wrong decision, the umpire must be banned.

[bharat297]

The CB series is a bad example because in ODI matches ... even the main umpires do not need to be neutral.

[Zakhmi]

Its ridiculous to see the fate of third umpire during aussies tour, though third umpire is a wise option for fair decisions. So, instead of calling it the third umpire it can be stated as technical support to the two umpires on the field and whenever, the field umpires signal this technician should go through the replay and send the reality of happening to the field umpires and then they must give the decision.

[Anakin]

yes

[King Tendulkar]

hell yeah!

[Ram]

No need, just because some idiot botches it up once in a while, doesnt mean we have to reform the entire system. Next what, neutral bowlers and fielders ? :P

[fineleg]

No need' date=' just because some idiot botches it up once in a while, doesnt mean we have to reform the entire system. Next what, neutral bowlers and fielders ? :P[/quote'] if ur ok with having a TV umpire, really - whats wrong with having a neutral one? Takes the bias thing out a little bit atleast, doesn't it?

[Ram]

if ur ok with having a TV umpire, really - whats wrong with having a neutral one? Takes the bias thing out a little bit atleast, doesn't it?

Bias, what bias ? Tell me of 5 decisions which you think the third umpire got wrong, I will tell of you 5000 which he got right.

[Lurker]

No. We need neutral fans more than we need any of these mumbo-jumbos.

[fineleg]

Bias' date=' what bias ? Tell me of 5 decisions which you think the third umpire got wrong, I will tell of you 5000 which he got right.[/quote'] MM, Did you see the Finals? How the third umpire took enormous time deciding a basic caught behind decision? Its not a question of tell me one, I'll tell you many. The point is - whats wrong with having neutral umpires. It makes both teams feel more comfortable and reinforces confidence. Hire some quality neutral umpires (1st or 2nd or 3rd or TV umpires .....does not matter which one). Why do you say No? Do you feel neutral umpires cause an issue? Is that why you are saying no to them? Or should we not change status quo?

[Ram]

MM, Did you see the Finals? How the third umpire took enormous time deciding a basic caught behind decision? Its not a question of tell me one, I'll tell you many. The point is - whats wrong with having neutral umpires. It makes both teams feel more comfortable and reinforces confidence. Hire some quality neutral umpires (1st or 2nd or 3rd or TV umpires .....does not matter which one). Why do you say No? Do you feel neutral umpires cause an issue? Is that why you are saying no to them? Or should we not change status quo?

Its not a question of changing the status-quo. Its a question of allowing a system that works wonderfully well 99 times out of 100, to continue. In the clamor making everything neutral, dont lose your sense of perspective.

[Holysmoke]

If we have a system that works 99% of the time, and we can get one that works 99.001% of the time, why not try it? I really dont understand why we dont have neutral third umps!

[Mr. Wicket]

I don't see why we need neutral umpires in the first place, I'd much rather see the best ones regardless of nationality. Give me 'home' Taufel standing in an Australia/India test any day over Bucknor, Benson or Doctrove.

[DomainK]

We do not need neutral umpires, we need good, efficient and impartial umpires. Neutral umpires mean neutral by geography. Dont forget that it was an West Indian umpire who supported Australia over India. Neutral is not the solution.