Of Money, Memorabilias, and Farewell Speeches

[Anakin]

And you please understand too. Its not meant to get EVERY decision right EVERY time. Then, cricket wont be the sport that we like so much today.

Again, why not? Never seen any rules saying that human factors are not to be improved. I suppose we could get rid of covers for the pitches as well. And who says or decides that OZs have to enjoy the rub of the green more than asian teams?

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[Ram]

Again' date=' why not? Never seen any rules saying that human factors are not to be improved. I suppose we could get rid of covers for the pitches as well. [/quote'] Again, check your points before you put them forward. Uncovered pitches are a hazard for batsman, thats why they were scrapped.

And who says or decides that OZs have to enjoy the rub of the green more than asian teams?

And how in the world you say that ? Besides, i am done with this. I have repeated my points on more than one occasion in this very same board. I am out

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[Ram]

@Boss. I know i have responded to EVERY single point of your earlier too, in that " Counties withdraw referral experiment" thread. I dont want to waste time saying the same thing, again and again.

[Anakin]

Again, check your points before you put them forward. Uncovered pitches are a hazard for batsman, thats why they were scrapped. And how in the world you say that ? Besides, i am done with this. I have repeated my points on more than one occasion in this very same board. I am out

So what, that could as well be charm of the game since we allow the umps to screw the batsmen anyway. Anyone who's been watching ind or pak or sl play ozs would know what I'm talking about, unless of course you're determined not to believe facts. BW actually did a count of rub of the green and guess the result.

[Chandan]

Why do spectators have shell out so many dollars to put up with this? Why do young players like Sharma and Pathan have to go through what can be career changing moments for them because the incompetents hired to do the job can't do it properly? Sharma and Pathan are going to lose their jobs for the next match when India's main bowlers return but Tauffel and Rudi will sit in meetings with ICC top notchs, happily knocking down one test after another, earning big bucks, and when they have given players and spectators misery over 100+ test matches and they feel they have enough retirement money they will retire and everyone will praise their hard work and dedication to cricket with more money, memorabilia, and farewell speeches. Is there a better career path to pursue in today's professional world? Drop me a line if you think so.

We had discussed this point earlier too. Shwetabh, we had come to the conclusion that replays should be used to avert absolute howlers like bat not being anywhere near the ball and batsman given out caught, or line decisions, if the ball had pitched outside legstump to avoid LBW howlers. But how can we eradicate the 4 decisions that you mentioned unless we fully embrace hawk-eye? And I don't think we should go that far to embrace hawk-eyes or hot-spots or snickos completely. So please give your solutions. Also I just can't think of any reason why were those LBW decisions as well as that against Karthik, not upheld. What possible doubt did the umpire have?

[Ram]

For anyone who is interested in knowing my stance on it, http://indiancricketfans.com/showthread.php?t=56052

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[Chandan]

BB, MM is in a minority and I suppose that majority of fans want to have an improved situation. Please mention your solutions.

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[Ram]

Boss, I dont want to sound disrespectful to you by not responding, but as i have said, i am sure we have discussed each and every point in the previous thread.

[Ram]

BB, MM is in a minority and I suppose that majority of fans want to have an improved situation. Please mention your solutions.

Chandan, I never said i didnt want change. Read this post of mine

Lets have a cursory glance at all the responsibilities that an umpire has Scoring based

• Count the balls of an over
• Signal fours and sixes
• Look for over-stepping and declare wides
• Declare byes and leg-byes

On field control

• Make sure there are only 11 players on the field
• Make sure the fielders arent placed out of their valid position ( like having 3 fielders behind square on the leg side)

• Keep a note of the number of overs bowled by an player so that he doesnt bowl more than his quota ( in case of ODIs)

On-field discipline

• Make sure the pitch is not tampered
• Guard against ball tampering
• Ensure harmony amongst players on the field and stop incidents from blowing up.

Match regulations based

• Look out for bad light , and offer it to the batsman when needed
• Inform captain of change in targets in case of duckworth lewis system being used
• Keep a note of change in playing conditions like a wet outfield

There is a specific reason why i have highlighted certain points in bold. I feel that , in order to save the energy of an umpire and make sure he gets concentration right every ball so that he could crucial LBW decisions right , we must relieve him of some responsibilities that could be easily done by technology or the T.V umpire. At any point of the game , the umpire has to keep in mind MANY things. This could easily distract him and stop him from doing his primary job , that of getting decisions right , well. So here is what i propose we do. Counting balls , overs, signaling boundaries and keeping count of overs by different bowlers should be done by some other match official like the T.V umpire , who for most times , sits and idles away his time No-balls should be adjudged by technology. The single biggest impediment for an umpire to get an LBW decision right is that fact that he has to watch out for over-stepping and then immediately shift focus to the ball. We should use the latest available technology to determine if the bowler had overstepped The umpires responsibilities on the cricket field must be restricted to

• Giving LBW and caught behind decisions
• Declaring wides , byes and leg-byes
• Ensuring on-field discipline
• Stop ball and pitch tampering
• Keeping track of playing and pitch conditions.

If we do this , I am pretty sure we would see a drastic reduction of errors in the LBW and caught behind decisions that an umpires make. This way, we achieve two targets with a single shot. Number one , we can please the purists of the game who feel an umpire is necessary to uphold the spirit of the game. Number two , we can also satisfy those who have been calling for umpires to be replaced by technology. After all , their genuine bone of contention is not against the umpire , but the mistakes he makes. If we can stop that from happening , i am sure they would also have no problem against having an on-field umpire. Cricket would be half-dead if we were to replace the man-in-white with a robotic camera. The key is to aide the umpires in decision making with appropriate use of technology so that the errors he makes would be minimized.

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[The Outsider]

We had discussed this point earlier too. Shwetabh, we had come to the conclusion that replays should be used to avert absolute howlers like bat not being anywhere near the ball and batsman given out caught, or line decisions, if the ball had pitched outside legstump to avoid LBW howlers. But how can we eradicate the 4 decisions that you mentioned unless we fully embrace hawk-eye? And I don't think we should go that far to embrace hawk-eyes or hot-spots or snickos completely. So please give your solutions. Also I just can't think of any reason why were those LBW decisions as well as that against Karthik, not upheld. What possible doubt did the umpire have?

Chandan, for yesterday's leg befores and the Karthik one as well there was no need for Hawk Eye. To everyone watching the match they looked dead except to the umpires. Even morons like Arun Lal could see they were dead and if there was any doubt just a simple replay would have cleared it up. No need for Hawk Eye.

[Chandan]

1. 3 Referals per innings 2. Third umpire gets to use at least tramlines , close up replays and most importantly common sense. 3. A mindset change - This requires letting go of the fat ego very hard to do when the guys incharge are a bunch of control freaks with absolute ZERO accountability and are entrusted with COMPLETE power.

What would you include in the referral? Plus I just can't believe that the tramlines would have solved Taufel's problem today. He was pretty sure if the ball was pitched outside leg. That is why I ashed Shwetabh, what possibly could be umpire's doubt? Height? No. Ball had hit well below the knee roll. Going down the leg? Possibly because of Ishant bowling from wide off the crease. In Irfan's case? No idea at all! But don't think those lines would help umpire like Taufel. They might help umpire like Askoker De Silva or Rauf, but not Taufel. Then?

[The Outsider]

Hahah.. that is laughable. So , what you are essentially saying is - Players make a career for themselves, ONLY out merit and nothing else ?

Don't you think player careers on any other careers for that matter should be on merit alone and all efforts must be made to make the system that such a thing happens.

No, there is a fundemental difference between the two scenarios. The TA/professor is not making split second decisions, therefore there would NO justification for him to make flagrant errors in his grading. Umpiring is not like that. And its not just in cricket, poor line calls have affected so many sports like football, rugby, basketball.

Yesterday's errors were flagrant and there is no justification for flagrant errors in any field where professionalism is the mantra. I am not the one to whine about balls kissing leg stump et. but dead straight decisions not being given, means either heads must roll to put some fear in these bunch of nincompoops or they should be given the aid of technology. We cannot afford to have international matches and player's careers at the mercy of these fools.

[coffee_rules]

I don't believe Hawk-eye for LBWs. All the innings will be under 200 if we give LBWs based on hawkeye. I am for any technology to refer bump catches, snicks. Didn't see the notouts. But if the ball is not pitched in-line of stumps, the batsmen lunges forward. The cricket laws of LBW says the umpire can't give those out, even if Hawkeye shows that the ball would have gone on to hit the middle stump. Altho' the umpires can refer if there was an inside edge before ruling out a plumb lbw. In Salman Butt's case, it was plumb out, but the umpire had a small doubt about the ball hitting the bat before the pad. He could have asked the third ump, one simple question and then ruled the LBW.

[Sachinism]

pathan also had butt out when the score was on 111-1 umpire didnt give it