Third umpire instead of DRS

[virufan]

Instead of making a big fuss about DRS, they can as well leverage the third umpire to good effect. LBW decisions can be taken by third umpire after satisfactorily seeing the replays any number of times. Ross Taylor type dismissals could be avoided by adopting this method, atleast the snick can be perceived by the 3rd umpire even if he is not able to judge whether the ball will go on to hit the stumps.

[Clarke]

In the suggested SYSTEM, is the third umpire allowed to REVIEW the DECISION of the on-field umpire ?

[Trichromatic]

Umpires are supposed to give an out decision only when they are sure. If they are sure why would they consult third umpire? If a provision is made by which third umpire can intervene then it would be very confusing situation. Some batsmen won't walk and force third umpire to review it even when they are out or if a batsman is walking then he would have to be called back. So probably it won't work for out decisions. If umpires are not sure then they should be allowed to consult the third umpire. It will effect not-out decisions only, but it may give rise to too many controversies. If third umpires make all decisions then ICC will have to reduce the salaries of on-field umpires. :giggle:

[virufan]

Umpires are supposed to give an out decision only when they are sure. If they are sure why would they consult third umpire? If a provision is made by which third umpire can intervene then it would be very confusing situation. Some batsmen won't walk and force third umpire to review it even when they are out or if a batsman is walking then he would have to be called back. So probably it won't work for out decisions. If umpires are not sure then they should be allowed to consult the third umpire. It will effect not-out decisions only, but it may give rise to too many controversies. If third umpires make all decisions then ICC will have to reduce the salaries of on-field umpires. :giggle:

Bcci is against DRS because they are not sure of the Hawkeye technology. Still, like DRS, players have right to review but third umpire will take the decision in such cases. All the umpires will take decisions, so no question of reduction of salaries. It is either a right or wrong decision :)

[Trichromatic]

Bcci is against DRS because they are not sure of the Hawkeye technology. Still' date=' like DRS, players have right to review but third umpire will take the decision in such cases. All the umpires will take decisions, so no question of reduction of salaries. It is either a right or wrong decision :)[/quote'] So, third umpire will be able to overrule the field umpire decision. It will work well in case of inside edges and howlers, but what in case of closer decisions. If third umpire overrules the decision then you're assuming that third umpire is better predictor of ball when he is not even directly in front of the action. Then it will controversial in the sense that which decisions will third umpire overrule and which decisions he won't. In certain decisions players, experts will feel that field umpire was right and there isn't much evidence to overrule his decision, while in decisions field umpire's decision not to overrule was wrong. It will solve some issues and add new ones. How many reviews will be allowed? If number of reviews are unlimited then in all cases third umpire will have final authority which will make field umpires useless. If number of reviews limited then it will again make it tactical. :dontknow:

[Crookbond]

We want the game to finish on that day!

[Trichromatic]

We want the game to finish on that day!

Yeah, a lot of time will be wasted in many reviews.

[GautiMaan]

Surely the third umpire must be allowed to intervene in the case of howlers

[Trichromatic]

Surely the third umpire must be allowed to intervene in the case of howlers

Who decides what's howler and what's not?

[zep1706]

Who decides what's howler and what's not?

Any mistake that's conclusive from just TV replays/slow-mo without using any other fancy technology? Most blunders can be corrected that way, for marginal decisions where there is no conclusive evidence from the TV replays let's stick with the on field decision. I believe such a system can be devised and it will work. We accept third umpires judgement for close run outs, which is solely based on TV replays and slow-mo, why not for others as well. I also think that the no ball decisions should be called from the upstairs, appoint a special umpire if needed, it will also help the on field umpires to a great extent.

[GautiMaan]

Who decides what's howler and what's not?

Match refree/Third umpire himself,dont think it would take much time to look into a wrong lbw or other things that are obvious.

[zep1706]

I would say keep the players review system as it is, that is 3 reviews per team per inning, but also let the on field umpires ask the opinion of the 3rd umpire if they have any doubt like they do for run outs/bump balls etc. 3rd umpire uses TV replays/slow-motion and comes up with a decision.

[Trichromatic]

Any mistake that's conclusive from just TV replays/slow-mo without using any other fancy technology? Most blunders can be corrected that way' date=' for marginal decisions where there is no conclusive evidence from the TV replays let's stick with the on field decision. I believe such a system can be devised and it will work. We accept third umpires judgement for close run outs, which is solely based on TV replays and slow-mo, why not for others as well. I also think that the no ball decisions should be called from the upstairs, appoint a special umpire if needed, it will also help the on field umpires to a great extent.[/quote']

[zep1706]

Even in some cases field umpires will feel that decision of third umpire was wrong. There can't be any limit which decisions can be changed by third umpire. In case of run-outs and stumps, field umpires don't give any decision. They directly refer it to third umpire. There is no clash between their decision and decision of third umpire.

What about bump catches? If that can work any decision can work. My aim is to remove the absolute howlers and I can live with decisions which can go either way.

[Trichromatic]

What about bump catches? If that can work any decision can work. My aim is to remove the absolute howlers and I can live with decisions which can go either way.

Isn't the case almost same in case of DRS? :dontknow: It removes howlers and other decisions are mostly ones which can go either way. In current system it gives preference to field umpire decisions which means marginal calls remain consistent with original decision. Few mistakes either because of third umpire (Kallis' dismissals) or rare Hughes dismissals which happens.

[zep1706]

Isn't the case almost same in case of DRS? :dontknow: It removes howlers and other decisions are mostly ones which can go either way. In current system it gives preference to field umpire decisions which means marginal calls remain consistent with original decision. Few mistakes either because of third umpire (Kallis' dismissals) or rare Hughes dismissals which happens.

My earlier objection of the DRS techs was that the techs were not properly reviewed by any independent authority. ICC was ready to accept the words of the manufacturer without any proper testing. But if I am not mistaken they actually did a test of the system which found it acceptable. So frankly if those findings are true I have no objection in accepting the current system. Having said that I'd like to see ICC officials operating the system as opposed to the home broadcaster and they must find a way to make it available for boards that can't afford it. ---- My argument in favor of using just the TV replays is that the whole purpose of DRS was to remove howlers and they can be removed simply from TV replays and slow-motion. Technologies, if they work as they should, can definitely improve upon that, but to remove howlers one doesn't need any fancy technology.

[JaFanatic]

yea i dont like this rule of players deciding to review the umpires' decision

[StriKe]

bump too many in today's match

Malinga to Vettori, OUT, that's game over for Vettori! It's that slower ball and it was a yorker, hits the batsman right in front and that is an easy decision for the umpire. But Vettori was disappointed and rightly so, the ball had hit the inside edge on its way. Unfortunately for him, his friend Kane W had used up the review earlier...

[Crookbond]

Check Franklin too. If I'm not wrong even McCullum was give not out, when he was.

[Junyfan]

that will not work.