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

[theguyinallblue]

I understand that and it is not a proven technology. Many a times we see in snicko the vibrations even if ball and bat are far apart. These technologies are devices for the TV audience to make them more interested in such decisions' date= not from a point of view of proving a decision of umpire right or wrong. I don't have full faith in hawkeye either. Many a times when the bowler has hit the stump, the hawkeye has shown that the ball would've missed the stumps. I don't think hawkeye can read the late swing or sharp turns from spinners. Nor do I think of it having an ability to read googlies. So as long as clear howlers are removed, I'm happy.

well...even if i accept your argument of Snicko meter...i don't think there is any ambiguity in HOT-SPOT.. This technology can clearly tell..which part of the body or bat came in contact with the ball.... its very very difficult to judge faint edges which are on the leg side...and hot-spot can be very useful in those scenarios..

[Chandan]

well...even if i accept your argument of Snicko meter...i don't think there is any ambiguity in HOT-SPOT.. This technology can clearly tell..which part of the body or bat came in contact with the ball.... its very very difficult to judge faint edges which are on the leg side...and hot-spot can be very useful in those scenarios..

Don't think I'll have full faith in hot-spot either! Remember the final ODI vs England in England last year. Dravid was sure that the ball had not touched either his bat or gloves but the hot-spot showed that it did. I just can't believe that a batsman will not know if the ball brushed his bat or gloves! So, I don't think even the players would like to have this technology! I think the system is okay as it is. There will certainly be few teething problems earlier on. But if we iron them out and if the players as well as officials keep their patience till then, it'll be a good addition to the game. Aravinda, Manjrekar support review system Agencies Posted online: Monday , June 23, 2008 at 05:15:52 Updated: Monday , June 23, 2008 at 06:47:45 Mumbai, June 23: Former Test cricketers Sanjay Manjrekar and Aravinda De Silva on Monday supported the umpire review system to be introduced by the International Cricket Council for the first time on an experimental basis during the July-August India-Sri Lanka Test series. Manjrekar, who will be the anchor for Ten Sports during the Test and ODI series to be played in Sri Lanka from July 23-August 29, felt that whenever a third umpire is brought into the picture there is enhanced interest among viewers at the ground and in front of the TV. "The spectator interest rises whenever a decision is referred to the third umpire. Yes, there could be some slowing down of the proceedings, but I feel the bigger culprit is the dismal over-rates maintained by teams which slows down the game a lot," said the 42-year-old former India Test and ODI middle order batsman. Former Test and ODI batsman De Silva, who is a member of the interim committee of the Sri Lanka Cricket (Board) headed by his one-time skipper Arjuna Ranatunga, said that if technological help is available for the umpire to take the correct decision then it must be given to the official. "When you have a system in place to eliminate doubts (in the umpire's mind) we should make use of it even if cuts down the pace of the game a bit because you are playing with the careers of cricketers and their future," he said at the function to announce IDEA Cellular as the title sponsors of the series in the Emerald Isle. As per the experimental umpire review system, the batting and fielding side will be allowed three unsuccessful appeals to be referred to the (third) umpire per innings to change a decision if it is perceived to have been incorrect. These appeals can be made only by the batsman in receipt of the umpire's original decision or the captain of the fielding side. The on-field umpire will then consult with the third umpire who will review available TV coverage of the incident before relaying fact-based information back to his colleague who will take the final call on the matter. The Cricket Board has agreed to implement the trial for the three-Test series from July 23-August 12. The two former cricketers differed whether the switch-hit, as was played by England's Kevin Pietersen by changing his stance from right to left before the ball was bowled against New Zealand during the on-going ODI series, should be allowed or not. Aravinda felt that it was unfair for the bowlers when batsman are allowed to switch from being right-handed to left or vice versa when they are about to deliver the ball while Manjrekar felt that for the moment he would go by the decision of the game's lawmakers Marylebone Cricket Club to allow it. "When you allow switch-hitting you should also allow the bowler from getting a leg before decision to balls pitched outside the leg stump if they would have gone and hit the stumps. You should give the bowler also some chance to get wickets," De Silva said. But Manjrekar supported MCC's views that this was a high-risk shot which gives bowlers more chances to get the batsmen out.

[Chandan]

Umpire referral system lacks clear-cut vision We'll be using the umpire referral system during SL test series but is it clear? Has BCCI gone into details as ECB and CSA went and then finally disagreed on the finer points? Is this system going to be useful? Will this be able to help the umpires give more correct decisions, remove the howlers completely, satisfy the complaining fans and players? In short, will it be successful and become an integral part of cricket. Last year ECB has trialled this in their domestic matches but the system failed myserably as the third umpire refused to go against the field umpire and not even one decision was overturned. So is the vision of this system clear cut? Umpire referral system lacks clear-cut vision By Steve James Last Updated: 1:46am BST 08/07/2008 The Test series against South Africa beginning on Thursday is going to be mighty interesting. But it might have been even more interesting. For it might have been the first Test series in which the controversial umpire referral system was trialled. But the respective boards could not agree on the finer details, so Sri Lanka and India will become the guinea pigs later this month. Right or wrong: Michael Di Venuto leaves the field after being controversially given out during semi-final It is a shame. Those believing that such a system will never be in general use at international level are deluded. Believe me, it's coming whether you like it or not. And so it should be. Technology must be embraced. Why should television viewers at home be able to see an umpire has committed a howler while the side wronged against has no right of appeal? For the referral system should be mainly for howlers. It should not be for marginal decisions. It should be for the clear-cut decisions which can change games, cause acrimony and affect umpires' later decisions. There were two classic examples in the recent Friends Provident Trophy semi-finals. In the first match Durham's Michael Di Venuto was adjudged lbw when he had clearly got a huge inside edge first. Then in the second match Yorkshire's left-handed opener Adam Lyth was given out lbw when the ball obviously pitched a considerable distance outside of leg stump. Both were shocking decisions; both could have been rectified in an instant. It was sad that nothing like this happened in the ill-fated experiment in last year's Friends Provident Trophy. The referral system was used in ten matches and of 11 referrals not one was overturned. It was a schemozzle. It seemed that the ECB was only conducting the experiment under pressure from the ICC. The umpires did not want to upset their colleagues (Masonic handshakes all round) and the players were disappointingly blinkered. Some captains agreed beforehand not to use the system. One conspiracy theory hinted that the ECB had appointed their better umpires to these games so as to avoid howlers, and so also to avoid justification of the system. Of course the technology is not infallible. For instance the predictive Hawkeye should not be used to judge lbws, and will not be in Sri Lanka. But those edges and balls pitching outside leg stump can usually be seen easily. Each side will only be permitted three unsuccessful referrals per innings. So selfishness will soon be outed. Those batsmen who always claim to be not out will be found out and hounded by angry colleagues. It might even bring some honesty back into the game. Who knows, walking might even reappear. And please don't give me that claptrap about the umpire's word being final and players not wishing to question their decision. Players do that all the time. Oh go on then, give me that claptrap if you must. All thoughts gladly heard.

[cowboysfan]

best thing i have read today-very good article.I hope we use it well in sri lanka.

[theguyinallblue]

i think this referral system is pretty much clear cut... 1. every team gets 3 chances per innings.. 2. any decision of field umpire can be challenged... but the parameter of third umpire is limited.. 3. more fine tunings will be needed of we are to embrace referral system completely.. some present drawbacks of this system are 1. in case of LBW.. third umpire can only judge if there was any inside edge or whether the ball pitch inline or not...and if the ball hit the pad within the stumps... one major issue here is that...if LBW case is referred to him...and the ball was a No Ball...third umpire can not correct that. Now this is an idiotic rule..and i can't really comprehend how some one came up with this rule. and i am not sure if Third umpire can correct the No-ball mistake..for any referral... what are your apprehensions on this referral system chandan...?

[cowboysfan]

i think this referral system is pretty much clear cut... 1. every team gets 3 chances per innings.. 2. any decision of field umpire can be challenged... but the parameter of third umpire is limited.. 3. more fine tunings will be needed of we are to embrace referral system completely.. some present drawbacks of this system are 1. in case of LBW.. third umpire can only judge if there was any inside edge or whether the ball pitch inline or not...and if the ball hit the pad within the stumps... one major issue here is that...if LBW case is referred to him...and the ball was a No Ball...third umpire can not correct that. Now this is an idiotic rule..and i can't really comprehend how some one came up with this rule. and i am not sure if Third umpire can correct the No-ball mistake..for any referral... what are your apprehensions on this referral system chandan...?

because if thats done then we will referring every noball the umpire missed.

[theguyinallblue]

actually cowboy... No Ball can not be referred... actually suppose you are given LBW out and you thought that ball pitched outside off stump...and you challenged the decision of the field umpire...and this ball was a front foot no ball...but umpire did not notice it. now when third umpire sees the replays....he finds that ball pitched in line...but also notices that it was a front foot na ball..and this batsman can not be OUT. still he will give decision on the question that was asked to him..whether the ball pitched in line or not? he can't tell the umpire that the ball was a no ball..and this batsman is not out... so even after the decision is referred...and batsman was not out..still he has to go..

[DomainK]

actually cowboy... No Ball can not be referred... actually suppose you are given LBW out and you thought that ball pitched outside off stump...and you challenged the decision of the field umpire...and this ball was a front foot no ball...but umpire did not notice it. now when third umpire sees the replays....he finds that ball pitched in line...but also notices that it was a front foot na ball..and this batsman can not be OUT. still he will give decision on the question that was asked to him..whether the ball pitched in line or not? he can't tell the umpire that the ball was a no ball..and this batsman is not out... so even after the decision is referred...and batsman was not out..still he has to go..

And there we are allowing technology to detect a mistake and let it go. Stupid. If a certain case is refereed to the third umpire requesting to overturn the field umpire's decision, he should see if there was any reason for the over turning. If there is even one, he should overturn it. As far as English view on this is concerned, I don't give a damn what they think. They are the most traditional people and they always have a reservation against a modern development. Even today the security check of their parliament is done with a candle....not because its better, but because its been a tradition from days when electricity was not developed.

[cowboysfan]

actually cowboy... No Ball can not be referred... actually suppose you are given LBW out and you thought that ball pitched outside off stump...and you challenged the decision of the field umpire...and this ball was a front foot no ball...but umpire did not notice it. now when third umpire sees the replays....he finds that ball pitched in line...but also notices that it was a front foot na ball..and this batsman can not be OUT. still he will give decision on the question that was asked to him..whether the ball pitched in line or not? he can't tell the umpire that the ball was a no ball..and this batsman is not out... so even after the decision is referred...and batsman was not out..still he has to go..

didnt know that-I still like the system -they will iron out the kinks eventually.

[fineleg]

There will lotsa problems for the first year or two - they should persist and work it out, and embed technology into cricket umpiring permanently.

[Chandan]

After reading Dhondy's post about the tendency of Indian team of not preparing fully for the tactics before a series, I fear that the Indians would have overlooked the finer points of this facility of referral to the third umpire available to them during the series and hence will not benefit much from this or will mess up with this during a match due to lack of clarity which might propel the ICC to bin the idea of referral system!

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[The Outsider]

After reading Dhondy's post about the tendency of Indian team of not preparing fully for the tactics before a series' date=' I fear that the Indians would have overlooked the finer points of this facility of referral to the third umpire available to them during the series and hence will not benefit much from this or will mess up with this during a match due to lack of clarity which might propel the ICC to bin the idea of referral system![/quote'] It's got little to do with preparation, although that might play a role as well, but the challenge system is so inherently flawed that it will never work. In a traditionalist sport like cricket challenges will rarely be overturned and will just lead to more confusion in the system. ICC got only the part about introducing technology right - they missed out completely on the best way to introduce it.

[theguyinallblue]

i don't think with a proper coach and a captain like Kumble...we will under prepare ourselves... why do we have so many support staff... unless.BCCI strikes a deal with ICC and asks its players make the referral system a failure..:winky:

[The Outsider]

^ Don't worry, ICC won't have to do anything to ensure that the referral system is a failure. The very manner in which it is designed and is planned to be implemented will make sure that the system bombs. It's very concept of an umpire's decision being challenged by the players will not go down well not just with the umpires but also the players also. Moreover, challenges and referrals are going to be made only against good players making it a lop sided rule against them. Why would you waste a challenge on Sreesanth when you can use it on Tendulkar?

[theguyinallblue]

actually shwetabh....i don't quite agree fully with your point here... obviously...fielding captain will be careful to use his 3 chances of referral..but if fielding side is confident of a nick...and umpire did not notice it...then the fielding captain will not hesitate to refeer the decision...as he would be sure to get the decision in his favour and thus still retaining the 3 chances to refer.. similarly...if number 11 batsman knows that there was in inside edge and he is not LBW...then obviously he would refer it to the third umpire...knowing that third umpire will correct the mistake of field umpire... obviously...TV umpire will be under more pressure and scrutiny now...as millions of TV viewer will be watching the replays and they too will come to know..whether the decision of field umpire was right or wrong..

[cowboysfan]

^ Don't worry' date=' ICC won't have to do anything to ensure that the referral system is a failure. The very manner in which it is designed and is planned to be implemented will make sure that the system bombs. It's very concept of an umpire's decision being challenged by the players will not go down well not just with the umpires but also the players also. Moreover, challenges and referrals are going to be made only against good players making it a lop sided rule against them. Why would you waste a challenge on Sreesanth when you can use it on Tendulkar?[/quote'] I have some questions- How much time is the batsman alloted to decide if he has to challenge or not?Is the batsman allowed to consult with the coaches to see if the TV replays shows clearly that he is not out(even though he knows that he is not out).Is the same true for the fielding captain?. I hope this works.I just cant bear one more Test match being turned on a wrong decision.

[fineleg]

actually shwetabh....i don't quite agree fully with your point here... obviously...fielding captain will be careful to use his 3 chances of referral..but if fielding side is confident of a nick...and umpire did not notice it...then the fielding captain will not hesitate to refeer the decision...as he would be sure to get the decision in his favour and thus still retaining the 3 chances to refer.. similarly...if number 11 batsman knows that there was in inside edge and he is not LBW...then obviously he would refer it to the third umpire...knowing that third umpire will correct the mistake of field umpire... obviously...TV umpire will be under more pressure and scrutiny now...as millions of TV viewer will be watching the replays and they too will come to know..whether the decision of field umpire was right or wrong..

sandeep, i guess what shwetabh is saying is that TV umpires rarely if ever override field umpire. That makes it an academic exercise. I hope they really make an effort to make this work well, we need to get tech working for decisions.

[Chandan]

i don't think with a proper coach and a captain like Kumble...we will under prepare ourselves... why do we have so many support staff... unless.BCCI strikes a deal with ICC and asks its players make the referral system a failure..:winky:

On the referral system, which would be introduced in the Test series, Kumble said: “It is for the first time we will be using it in the series. We are going to have a chat about it once we reach Sri Lanka with the officials. We will see how it goes. Kumble's comments above in this article shows that they have zero preparation for this up till now. Some where else Kumble was saying that slip fielders or wicket keeper are the best persons to detect a faint edge from the batsman or validity of an LBW appeal/decision. They haven't decided if captain will take a call in the field or they'll assign this job to a subsequent fielder. With Dhoni not touring this time, assigning the job to a nervous keeper would be disaster for India, in my opinion.

[theguyinallblue]

i am surprised that Gary and Kumble has not discussed this aspect of the game till now.... its a major tool in the hand of players....to correct the mistakes which can change the direction of the game.. Other than wicket keeper...bowler as well as slip fielder...can detect the edges... and to an extent you are right chandan that ....a keeper who has dropped a catch...will not be that confident if there is a case of faint edge...and would definitely not take a chance on himself to waste an appeal.. But i would be satisfied if our fab 4 batsmen use the appeal to their advantage...and while fielding we use it to challenge some very obvious edges or LBWs..