Technology and Umpires : Umpire review system trial in SL-India Tests

[Cricketics]

o it will be pain to listen to arjuna ranatunga.. and offcourse ranjit can they get pommie mbangwa and tony cozier for this series.. they are far better then these asian commentators

[THX_1138]

expect ganguly to squander all three chances on himself... probably on the same appeal...

[Chandan]

expect ganguly to squander all three chances on himself... probably on the same appeal...

Where does it say that chances are limited to just three?

[theguyinallblue]

although its not mentioned in the article...but the only 3 chances will be given to each side per innings in a test match..i think which is a fair enough number of chances... ans yes..if a fielding captain made an appeal...and decision was in the favour of appeal...then the referral chances will remain 3... i think this system should have come a lot earlier...i am really happy...at least no party can moan about bad umpiring..and the team who will play better will win matches...:two_thumbs_up:

[fineleg]

Yes, even though this "article" does not say 3, I think they'll have a limit of 3.

[Chandan]

although its not mentioned in the article...but the only 3 chances will be given to each side per innings in a test match..i think which is a fair enough number of chances... ans yes..if a fielding captain made an appeal...and decision was in the favour of appeal...then the referral chances will remain 3... i think this system should have come a lot earlier...i am really happy...at least no party can moan about bad umpiring..and the team who will play better will win matches...:two_thumbs_up:

Yes. The appeal or referral is limited to three in number. Here is an article which says this: India announce new appeals system 16 June 2008 Indian and Sri Lankan players will get the chance to challenge umpires' on-field decisions © Getty Images Buy this photo Players will have the opportunity to challenge decisions made by an umpire in a new system to be trialled during India’s tour of Sri Lanka. In a statement, the Board of Control for Cricket in India said they had agreed to test the new system in the three-Test, five one-day international series which starts on July 23 in Colombo. In a similar system to the one introduced at ATP and WTA tennis events in 2006, each team will be allowed three unsuccessful review requests per innings. Successful requests, which result in the the umpire changing his original decision, will not be counted towards the limit. The BCCI statement said: “A player may request the review of any decision taken by the on-field umpires concerning every dismissal with the exception of a ‘timed out' decision.” Following a request, the decision will be referred to the third umpire who would then base his decision on slow-motion replays, Hawk-eye technology for ball tracking purposes only and audio picked up by the stump microphones. Hawk-eye technology would not be used to determine future trajectory of the ball as usually shown on television broadcasts. “For reviews concerning potential dismissals, the player should then indicate 'out' by raising his finger above his head or indicate 'not out' by crossing his hands in a horizontal position side-to-side in front and above his waist three times. "Where the decision is a reversal of the on-field umpire's previous call, he should make the 'revoke last signal' indication immediately prior to the above," the BCCI added. Following the review, if the umpire upholds the decision of 'out' but for a different mode of dismissal from that for which the original decision was given, then the request will still be regarded as unsuccessful. .

[Mr. Wicket]

I really hope the BCCI impliment this in domestics too. The umpiring in the Ranjis at points was quite atrocious.

[coffee_rules]

How can you guys not appreciate Rameez Raja and Arun Lal address the players in first person. There is so much insight in lines like "Shoaib Mailk, what are you doing?" while commentating.

[yoda]

Finally, but I would prefer a random fan picked to look at the TV replays than a 3rd ump.

[Guest Hiten.]

expect ganguly to squander all three chances on himself... probably on the same appeal...

mauaahahuahauahua :hysterical::hysterical::hysterical:

[Ram]

Great to know that they are doing this. Finally, people can actually see first hand how its a totally ****ed up idea to refer decisions by the on-field umpire to the third umpire. Implementing this system is like opening the Pandora's box. Bottom line, there's no concept called 'absolute fairness' in cricket. Some balls dont swing as much as the other. The pitch conditions change dramatically sometimes. Some pitches dont roughen up as much as it does on the other. So, where will you start? More importantly, where will you end? Human errors in umpiring/refreeing is part and parcel of sport. Top-billed world cup football teams have eliminated from the competition coz of wrong off-side calls by refrees. Did anyone ask for a video referral in football? Besides, the Ind-Aus series of 2007-08 didnt generate so much hype for cricketing reasons alone. The umpires and the decisions they took, made this series one THE most high-profile and popular test series ever in the history of sport. Apart from an exhibition of natural talent, sport should also be a source of talking points, something you can chat about with your buddy over a cup of coffee. The previous Ind-Aus series was FULL of such talking points ( albeit for reasons other than cricketing most of the times). Removing the umpire's veto on the decisions will make the game dull, robotic and lifeless. Few months down the line, if people dont call for this to be scrapped, I will eat my shirt.

[fineleg]

Great to know that they are doing this. Finally, people can actually see first hand how its a totally ****ed up idea to refer decisions by the on-field umpire to the third umpire. Implementing this system is like opening the Pandora's box. Bottom line, there's no concept called 'absolute fairness' in cricket. Some balls dont swing as much as the other. The pitch conditions change dramatically sometimes. Some pitches dont roughen up as much as it does on the other. So, where will you start? More importantly, where will you end? Human errors in umpiring/refreeing is part and parcel of sport. Top-billed world cup football teams have eliminated from the competition coz of wrong off-side calls by refrees. Did anyone ask for a video referral in football? Besides, the Ind-Aus series of 2007-08 didnt generate so much hype for cricketing reasons alone. The umpires and the decisions they took, made this series one THE most high-profile and popular test series ever in the history of sport. Apart from an exhibition of natural talent, sport should also be a source of talking points, something you can chat about with your buddy over a cup of coffee. The previous Ind-Aus series was FULL of such talking points ( albeit for reasons other than cricketing most of the times). Removing the umpire's veto on the decisions will make the game dull, robotic and lifeless. Few months down the line, if people dont call for this to be scrapped, I will eat my shirt.

Now that MM appeared in this thread, this thread is complete :D

[Ram]

I have always believed that referring the umpire's decision to the third umpire is like tackling the wrong end of the problem. If an umpire makes frequent mistakes ( which he is bound to do, coz he is human after all and everything happens in the matter of milli-seconds), then the solution is not to over-rule him, but to assist him in decision making. The irony is, the technology is now there, to give the umpires the 'decision-assists'. We arent in the 30s, to say 'Oh, there's nothing we can do about it'. Things can be done to dramatically improve the efficiency of decision making. Its a pity that the powers-that-be have decided to take such a short-sighted, dumb move just to please a few sections of the media. Its only some restricted elements of the fans and the media that are clamoring for this 'referral' system. A vast majority of the international greats, both past and present, are not in favor introducing this system. And that isnt really surprising coz they have played the game for long enough, at a level high enough, to understand that the current system is what makes cricket the sport it is. In a way, the best thing could happen right now is for the system to be trialled, so finally, everyone can actually see what a truly dumb methodology it is and how it acts as a tremendous dampener to the pace and the excitement of the cricket.

[theguyinallblue]

sriram..since you are advocating for the assistance of field umpires by technology... i think the referral system is more or less the same...the only difference probably is that instead of field umpires.. its the third umpire who will be assisted with the technology.... if the use of technology guarantee the fair play for both sides..i don't think any conventionalist will object...even Wimbledon of all places..agreed to use technology for Line calls.. and also we should keep in mind that Umpires are some times biased and take favours... and more often than not borderline decisions go in favour of successful teams...even though benefit of doubt should have gone to the opposition.. and this referral system will definitely make players more honest at least n the field....we will not have the repeats of clarke claiming a bump catch...and ponting and Symonds olding ground..even after nicking one to the keeper..

[Desi Cartman]

Im just happy that more batsmen would have no option but to walk! I hate it when they stand like a MURTI after nicking it and hoping that Bucknor is not gonna give them out.

[theguyinallblue]

Technology and Umpires : Umpire review system trial in SL-India Tests although its a good news for Cricket Fans across the world that finally Referral system is being tried in test matches..whether this go on to become the Norm is worth waiting for... But Still there are few areas where ICC can take the initiative and try to minimize the human error.. Since the game of cricket is a game between Bowles and Batsmen..so only these two should be responsible for the outcome of any game or series..only then the fans will be satisfied with the game... The most controversial decisions in the game of cricket are LBWs... as it all depends on the judgment of Umpires...and his correctness in reading the path of the ball...and i think a human eye is best judge in these circumstances... BUT i am all in favour of assisting the field umpires in making the decisions of LBWs... There are still few rough areas which needs to be smoothen...for ex.. 1. if an LBW decision is referred to third umpire...then third umpire will only assist the field umpire in deciding whether the ball pitched in line of the stumps or the ball struck outside the line of stumps... if the Ball was a Front foot No Ball...then third umpire can not correct the field umpire on this... Now why would third umpire have no power to over rule the field umpire in this matter...its beyond my thinking,, 2. in decisions of LBW..the batsman can not possibly tell if the ball pitched outside the line or ball struck him outside the line of stumps...and he can not possible be sure enough to challenge the decision of umpire if given out... In this case...third umpire should intervene if he finds that field umpire made a mistake... I don't think this procedure is under consideration.. 3. Third Umpire should be from a neutral country..as the responsibility of the third umpire will increase .. 4. Third Umpire can take help of Slow motions and super slow motions..but many times..some frames are so difficult to judge..to find whether ball touched the bat or pad...in such cases...Heat Spot technology should be used to judge... 5. Front Foot No Ball should be judged by some machine...as it will greatly reduce the burden of of field umpires and then can concentrate more at the batsman end...many a times...field umpires have missed the front foot no ball...and that ball dismissed the batsman at the other end... if all these recommendations are incorporated ..then i am sure Game of cricket will be more fun to watch...

[flamy]

although its a good news for Cricket Fans across the world that finally Referral system is being tried in test matches..whether this go on to become the Norm is worth waiting for... But Still there are few areas where ICC can take the initiative and try to minimize the human error.. Since the game of cricket is a game between Bowles and Batsmen..so only these two should be responsible for the outcome of any game or series..only then the fans will be satisfied with the game... The most controversial decisions in the game of cricket are LBWs... as it all depends on the judgment of Umpires...and his correctness in reading the path of the ball...and i think a human eye is best judge in these circumstances... BUT i am all in favour of assisting the field umpires in making the decisions of LBWs... There are still few rough areas which needs to be smoothen...for ex.. 1. if an LBW decision is referred to third umpire...then third umpire will only assist the field umpire in deciding whether the ball pitched in line of the stumps or the ball struck outside the line of stumps... if the Ball was a Front foot No Ball...then third umpire can not correct the field umpire on this... Now why would third umpire have no power to over rule the field umpire in this matter...its beyond my thinking,, 2. in decisions of LBW..the batsman can not possibly tell if the ball pitched outside the line or ball struck him outside the line of stumps...and he can not possible be sure enough to challenge the decision of umpire if given out... In this case...third umpire should intervene if he finds that field umpire made a mistake... I don't think this procedure is under consideration.. 3. Third Umpire should be from a neutral country..as the responsibility of the third umpire will increase .. 4. Third Umpire can take help of Slow motions and super slow motions..but many times..some frames are so difficult to judge..to find whether ball touched the bat or pad...in such cases...Heat Spot technology should be used to judge... 5. Front Foot No Ball should be judged by some machine...as it will greatly reduce the burden of of field umpires and then can concentrate more at the batsman end...many a times...field umpires have missed the front foot no ball...and that ball dismissed the batsman at the other end... if all these recommendations are incorporated ..then i am sure Game of cricket will be more fun to watch...

I think it will mainly be for inside edges. The 5th point is a good idea except it doesnt give the batsman the notification it is a no-ball (which is annulled anyway because of the free hit rule in limited overs), but in tests, a batsman would like the notice so that he can play an adventurous shot. I know I do.

[flamy]

expect ganguly to squander all three chances on himself... probably on the same appeal...

:hysterical::hysterical::hysterical::cantstop:

[theguyinallblue]

flamy..may be a loud beep..just like in Tennis will notify the batsmen that its a No-Ball.. also may be Red Flash just front of Sight screen can also help...and we will hardly get 9-10 front foot no-balls in a day of a test match...so a loud beep should be bearable for spectators..

[flamy]

The red flash is better I think.