India Tour Australia 2011/12 - Umpiring Tales and Controversies

[J P K]

Greg Chappell digs into India over DRS Former Team India coach Greg Chappell on Monday backed Australian opener Ed Cowan's call for having compulsory DRS in all international matches, saying it will reduce the pressure on umpires and reduce the howlers. "There is no question, DRS has to be implemented uniformly to help cut down on umpiring errors," Chappell told Fox Sports. Chappell, whose two-year stint with the Indian team ended on an acrimonious note, said he could fully understand why Indian players were against the use of DRS. "They probably reckon that batsmen tend to benefit from close decisions," Chappell opined, blaming 'BCCI politics and money power' for the non-implementation of the DRS across the cricket world. Chappell, however, agreed that the technology used in DRS was not foolproof. "The problem is that the technology used is not perfect, but then nothing in the world is. You will still have a few errors, but the idea is to eliminate the howlers," Chappell said. Having said that, Chappell opined that the decisions made by the umpires against Mike Hussey and Ed Cowan on Monday didn't qualify as howlers. "When you look at the real-time images, you definitely get the impression that Hussey was out. Only when you look at the slow-motion replays do you realize that he had not nicked it. "In Cowan's case too, the umpire must have heard a noise which may have prompted him to give the batsman out," Chappell added. http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/sports/cricket/series-tournaments/india-in-australia/top-stories/Greg-Chappell-digs-into-India-over-DRS/articleshow/11259505.cms

[J P K]

hotspot shows no edge for gambhir :hysterical:

[Number]

hotspot shows no edge for gambhir :hysterical:

:haha:

[crics]

Cowan's bat did not pick edge and so did siddle's . drs :fail: or did they use Vaseline :hmmm:

YqexagbPcvg See what Channel 9 team are telling here :cantstop: "I dont think you can have these sort of technology used for these sort of dismissals. There is either a noise out there that Billy Bowden heard or not. I dont think, how many times we show these replays, we are not going to get any conclusive answer...." "The problem is, if you review every catch behind, probably most of them wouldnt show anything either, woundnt show hotspot, wont show any deflection. with just a little flick/ a noise, really the umpire is in the best position to know that."

[The Dark Horse]

:haha:

but..but..hotspot can't phail:--D

[kabira]

hot spot is not hot any more.

[Hell Raiser]

hotspot shows no edge for gambhir :hysterical:

I think it showed. There was a light spot.

[Viki_J]

:haha:

:haha:

[Viki_J]

hot spot is not hot any more.

:giggle: toh kyaa kare bhai

[Viki_J]

Cowan's bat did not pick edge and so did siddle's . drs :fail: or did they use Vaseline :hmmm:

they used vaseline i guess:haha:

[crics]

Umpiring errors are part of the game Here we go again - another Border Gavaskar Trophy on the line and it starts to get "tasty" after just one day. The Internet era merely serves to heighten the tensions because unlike the old-fashioned 'Letters to the Editor' which were usually written with more eloquence and vetted by editors, online blogs are much more raw and unfettered in both passion and vitriol. It's a classic Beauty and the Beast situation where we get to see what people are really thinking, protected by anonymity and distance, unhindered by rules about grammar and spelling, unafraid to vent opinions that range from sincere passion to patriotic fervour gone mad. I've seen some of that already this morning with reference to the DRS controversy. Some of it has been entertaining and illuminative whilst some of it has been just plain idiotic. That's the world wide web for you. From what I've read this morning, it seems to me that some bloggers have just lost their sense of balance and perspective, blinded by their bias for or against the two countries involved. Here's my attempt to bring some common-sense and logic back to the debate, arguing from a neutral position of indifference as to who wins but with a strong desire to see the Indian and Australians fans not rip each other to pieces with emotive arguments that go beyond mere cricketing matters. Many incidents over the last few years have unnecessarily damaged relations between us, starting with the infamous Sydney Test when Harbajhan Singh and Andrew Symonds clashed and extending off the field to more serious incidents involving student bashings and loose talk on both sides of the Indian Ocean. Let's start with the silly comments being bandied regarding the DRS not being used because it allows the Indians to cheat. It's not the ICC who are necessarily to blame, neither are the Indian cricketers themselves culpable. It was a decision agreed to at board level. Regardless of whether the BCCI has too much power or not, a topic for another debate altogether, the cricketers themselves are simply playing by the rules that were agreed before the series began. It's not like the Indian players suddenly introduced the playing condition when Michael Hussey walked out to bat. Everyone, including Hussey, knew the rules of engagement before that match started. Umpires make mistakes. That happens. Disappointed as Hussey may have been, surely he is not suggesting that he has never benefited from similar decisions going in his favour, either as individual or as a team. The accidental fact that it was a first-ball duck when his career is on the line shouldn't change anything. I'm not even sure if Hussey is complaining too much, apart from that initial show of frustration for which a man of his calibre and disciplinary record can surely be forgiven. It's the irrational fools with short memories who are quick to start labelling the opposition players as cheats who are the real cheats in my opinion. Short memories? Anyone remember when these teams last met during the New YearÃÔ Test? Symonds smashed the cover off the ball and chose to stand his ground. He was simply playing by the rules and any Indian fan who called him a cheat should be similarly embarrassed today. Symonds' innings defined the course of that Test match but the bottom line is that he was simply playing by the rules of the day. He was no more or less of a cheat than anybody was yesterday (unless Symonds himself is one of those mystery bloggers hiding behind a ridiculous pseudonym, venting irrational spleen to fuel tension). What about the Peter Siddle no-ball incident today when he castled Rahul Dravid? The replay reprieved Dravid, just like it did for Michael Clarke at the Gabba a few weeks ago. Dravid didn't ask for the replay - the umpire called for it himself because he was unsure, just like he did for Clarke who went on to score a big hundred. Both teams were aware that the umpires had this option available to them. It's not like Marais Erasmus made it up on the spot just to try and favour India. The only person at fault was Siddle for not keeping his foot behind the line. Australian supporters are entitled to be disappointed with the Hussey dismissal yesterday but if you hail from a cricketing culture that has always played by the code where batsmen do not walk and leave all decisions to the umpires, surely you have to accept that you take the rough with the smooth. How does yesterday's chain of events make the Indians cheats? Does that also make the Aussies cheats when they nick one and don't walk? I find it particularly amusing when Australian fans complain about genuine umpiring mistakes. As far back as I can recall, from junior cricket ranks upwards, our kids have been brought up on the notion that you only walk when your car has broken down. Leave all decisions to the umpires and if it's your lucky day, that's cricket. That system is fraught with hypocrisy because I've seen many batsmen scream like stuck pigs when they get a bad one, I've seen many fielding teams happily accept decisions when they acknowledge amongst themselves in the team huddle that the umpire clearly got it wrong and most amusingly, I've seen fielders who give the batsman an absolute gobful for not walking when he nicks it! If that's not hypocrisy, what is? Surely a system that is built around living with the umpire's verdict is inherently in danger of choking on its own words if they abuse batsmen for not walking when he gets away with one? Under these rules, the only ones who are cheats are the ones who want the rules to work both ways. And they accuse the BCCI of opportunism? Everyone's so busy accusing each other of dastardly deeds that they forget that it was a genuine mistake by the umpires. That happens. It works both ways. I read some ridiculous comments overnight that seemed to insinuate that the Indians opted against using DRS because it would allow them (the Indians) to get away with cheating. Where's the logic in that comment? That logic only holds true if the BCCI can somehow exert enough influence to infiltrate the game with crooked umpires. If that's the accusation, it is a very serious one indeed and completely destroys the fabric of the game. It's also a gross insult to the umpiring fraternity who clearly make mistakes on the field (as do the players) but would be appalled to think that the some cricket fans actually believe this is so. Any serious cricket follower who has watched the actual on-field umpiring incidents could not possibly think that there is a corrupt system in place that favours India more than other teams. It's just plain ridiculous. The long-term solutions lie in getting the respective governing bodies to agree on a system that is acceptable to all stakeholders, cricketers, fans, umpires and cricket boards alike. There's a much bigger debate to be had as to whether the technology is reliable enough to be used universally and whether the BCCI should be allowed veto rights based on their power alone. That's a political debate though and one that doesn't really figure in some of the blog comments from all fans who seem hell-bent on accusing each other of racist bias. What's new about a system that is controlled by the most powerful? We live in a world that runs entirely along those principles where the major industrial nations write the rules and everyone is forced to play by those rules. Those who choose to play by different rules get bombed into submission. One man's terrorist is another man's liberator. The debate about whether the BCCI has too much power or not is a worthy cause to contribute to but it has nothing whatsoever to do with whether players or umpires are cheats. All parties agreed to the system before the first ball was bowled. Just because yesterday's decisions may have come at the start of Ed Cowan's career and the end of Hussey's doesn't make it an act of foul play. By the end of the summer, I am sure the Indian batsmen too will cop some poor decisions so let's hope we don't see a repeat of the sanctimonious hand-wringing and ugly accusations against the umpires or the team who dare to appeal for a nick. Even if it involves Sachin Tendulkar. If he doesn't want to risk a poor decision, tell him not to make a mistake then! Clearly that's what we expect of umpires these days. So to those vitriolic and irrational bloggers out there who seem to thrive on cowardly insults across a forum where daft nicknames hide their true identity, try not to confuse on-field decisions with agreements made by cricket boards and the ICC. Those are systemic decisions that are as much about politics and power as it is about what is best for the game. I'm certainly not one of those who believes that any governing body, BCCI and Cricket Australia included, necessarily act in the best interests of the game. They act in the best interests of themselves. But let's divorce the players and umpires from some of the grubby individuals who skulk in the corridors of power. Some men are still honourable. Some men still make mistakes. They make honourable mistakes. That's not cheating

[CoverDrive]

What i don't understand is that why dont they use hot spot and Snicko together. even if both are 90% reliable - together they can give fairly accurate results.

[peterparker]

why to take DRS if umpire are supposed to do the judgement...and if it costs india the series, why to take it then...it is not charity work which happens

[sandeep]

Aussies whining I see the commentators, sportswriters and fan comments are overflowing with the fine whine of DRS. Whatever happened to the 'charm' of the game, and "it all evens out"... you Injuns whine too much etc etc?

[Vijay.Sharma]

If we win the series it is because there was no DRS, But if Australia wins the series then they will say it serves us right. I do not think that both the gadgets - Hot Spot and Hawk Eye can improve the Umpire's judgment by more than a percent or two. On the other hand I have seen many instances of the two gadgets clearly failing. If the gadgets cannot bring in a significant improvement to the decision making process then they need to be improved first. This dunn mean I am against DRS. I think the DRS must exist without these gadgets...simple plain replays with a pitch map for the line of the wicket can reduce 99.99% of the howlers. And I believe the objective of DRS must be to eliminate howlers. In fact I'd like to see the DRS being renamed as Decision Confirmation and Review System where the on field ump can initiate a request to the third ump just like he does for low catches and line calls, but now with the addition of inside edges, pitching outside leg, etc. And the third ump must not use any gadgets for verifying them...jsut simple plain replays. The "Referral" part of the system can come from two sources - either the third ump intervenes himself to tell the on field ump in case an obvious mistake is made. The second situation is that the batting team or fielding team ask for a referral. However, there must not be any limit on the number of referrals a team can ask for because then it would become a tactical thingy. But to tackle the problem of over referring a penalty can be introduced such that every wrong referral would cut about 3-5% of the team's runs or whatever is the right percentage which would hurt the team a bit. This will ensure that they will ask for reviews only when they are very sure. Finally and most importantly the system should be such that the default option should not be that the on field ump's decision stays but the correct decision is made. This rule will not find itself in practice too often since anyway only howlers will be looked into and those will be clear cut decisions unlike the 50-50 ones which cause the real trouble and make a joke of the DRS

[Sehwag1830]

Were Hussey and Ponting out today? Not complaining. I mean both were out lbw earlier but umpire didn't give ?

[ganeshran]

There is already a thread for umpiring decisions and controversies

[Aussie-r-best]

There were at least 5 absolute howlers of decisions in this test (oth for and against both sides). DRS would have saved cricket a lotof embarrassment internationally for having the technology and not using it... clearly it is better to use it if you have it. It isnt 100% accurate but it is clearly better than game changing inept umpires

[MCcricket]

There were at least 5 absolute howlers of decisions in this test (oth for and against both sides). DRS would have saved cricket a lotof embarrassment internationally for having the technology and not using it... clearly it is better to use it if you have it. It isnt 100% accurate but it is clearly better than game changing inept umpires

Wonder what this troll is doing here today , lol when he called Indian's as cheats, illiterates , stupid call center employees who cannot speak bloody English lol, very fair and rational Aussie or an average Aussie, wolf in sheeps clothing , or an Aussie trying to pass of as a humble , rational human . lol.:emc:cummon show your true colors , don't be shy,wonder what happened to all the native Australians, aborigins,we treat Aussies better then you guys treat Indians or colored people per your comments, Tait, Lee, Gilchrist, Steve Waugh, ask them something about Indian people and then eat the humble pie.

[Bradman99]

Wonder what this troll is doing here today ' date=' lol when he called Indian's as cheats, illiterates , stupid call center employees who cannot speak bloody English lol, very fair and rational Aussie or an average Aussie, wolf in sheeps clothing , or an Aussie trying to pass of as a humble , rational human . lol.:emc:cummon show your true colors , don't be shy,wonder what happened to all the native Australians, aborigins,we treat Aussies better then you guys treat Indians or colored people per your comments, Tait, Lee, Gilchrist, Steve Waugh, ask them something about Indian people and then eat the humble pie.[/quote'] He may be what you have mentioned, I don't know, but I don't see how what he posted warranted that type of response.