Challenge the Game or it's just not Cricket!!!! - written 1+ year ago

[suraj]

I had written the article below more than an year ago- yesterday's events brought back the frustration. I fail to understand what will it take for the cricket community to wake up and implement this simple rule? Cricket world has reached the point where the game owes fans, players and financial backers to allow teams 2-3 challenges that contest obvious umpiring errors in a match. Cricket laws clearly state that one of the ways a batsman can be dismissed is when the ball hits the pads of a visiting team’s batsman followed by a loud appeal and impassioned cheering from the home crowd- this form of dismissal is known as LBW. Well, not really but this was how Mohinder Amarnath showed it to be when he could do nothing right with his pads every time he played a test match in Pakistan. It was years ago when Amarnath could pad a delivery wide as Duleep Mendis’ belly outside the off-stump and still manage to be sent back to the pavilion by the strongest player in the Pakistan team- the homegrown UMPIRE! The fact that Imran Khan was not only a good bowler but also an excellent captain was amply proven by his pleas to bring in neutral umpires as every Pakistan victory at home was smeared with a taint of unfair play by the cricket world. The team was good but there was a difference between a “truly-earned†and a “who-knows-what-could-have- happened†victory. The situation is obviously much better years later but so are means to take it even further at a much faster pace- so what is holding us back?? Oh, those glorious Victorian principles of rules, masters of rules and the God-like messengers of rules with powerful fingers that could deliver a death blow for a batsman or admonish the angle of a bowler’s elbow. The arguments seem very strong- obey the rules as a true sportsman, cannot undermine the umpires’ authority and cannot stop the game. Forget hair’s high handedness and consider the most recent events: -Brian Lara given caught off a ball his bat he obviously did not touch- “who-knows-what-could-have- happened†if WI could challenge it; he had scored 40 not out and 87 in two innings before this one - SRT given out of a ball that missed the bat, the hand, the elbow and the shoulder but has to rely on the mercy of an unusual callback with Ponting admonishing the whole world for a fair decision - HS out of a non-touched ball, Haddin not giving run out, Dhoni out off a no ball… … the list goes on and on because of the lack of a challenge option for the cricket teams. Forget the recent examples but how about a batsman trying to make a comeback after an injury, working all his life for that one chance and is given out for a duck because of an obvious umpire’s error or a bowler denied a crucial wicket because the umpire could not hear that snick the whole world heard. Oh these are not fictitious situations, rather real examples of careers getting destroyed because of the century old conventions that “Thou Shalt not question the god-like umpiresâ€. Another issue often raised by puritans is that how can a very human like umpire operate under these pressures of making or breaking careers and deciding game winning decisions. Well, the simple solution is to give the umpire the comfort of knowledge that a team can considers them human 3 times in a game and can challenge their obvious mistakes to eliminate the tension and guilt of critical errors. Finally, the die-hard conservatives will argue that the game will be unnecessarily stopped and suffer from modern day technology invasion. Hmm, a max of six 3-4 minutes’ stoppages and crucial fair play decisions- you make the choice. A 1-5 day long game of cricket owes fixing of 5-6 errors to let the best team win. Anything less than that- It’s just not CRICKET!!!!!

[Chandan]

Agree with you completely Suraj, but I'm afraid it seems that this article will be worth bumping every tour---that is how bad the umpiring standards are!! And the blood really boils when they say that they don't need the help of technology to make correct decisions!

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[Ram]

YV830VANkbU Dont want to seem like blowing my own trumpet, but in this video, Symmonds has said exactly the same thing that i have been shouting my throat hoarse for the last 6 months on this board. Its about time people stop viewing an umpire as an external factor, who there to merely make the correct decisions. He is as much a player in the game, as the rest of the 22 men are. Like how the players make mistakes and get out or bowl poorly and influence the game, so do the umpires, who also influence the match, sometimes through their good judgment, and on other occasions, the lack of it.Asking for error-free umpiring is akin to asking for batsman who never get bowled, or for bowlers who never bowl a bad ball. Its not gonna happen, ever. We need the human element, using technology to make the decisions will destroy greatness of the game. I sincerely request the posters to remove the blinkers on their eyes for once and give this a serious thought.

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[suraj]

Like how the players make mistakes and get out or bowl poorly and influence the game, so do the umpires, who also influence the match, sometimes through their good judgment, and on other occasions, the lack of it.Asking for error-free umpiring is akin to asking for batsman who never get bowled, or for bowlers who never bowl a bad ball.

Why do the umpires not get dropped then as the players do? And this is again a perfect example of how cricket pundits view use of any technology or challenge as undermining the umpire. It is ultimately going to be less pressure on the umpire too if the right decision is made in close calls with use of these measures. Just as a player is expected to suck it up with a mistake that he has made on the field, the umpires should also be able to accept a reversal of their wrong decisions- to ensure there is not undue stoppage the no. of challenges can be restricted to a few for both teams.

[Chaos]

YV830VANkbU Dont want to seem like blowing my own trumpet, but in this video, Symmonds has said exactly the same thing that i have been shouting my throat hoarse for the last 6 months on this board. Its about time people stop viewing an umpire as an external factor, who there to merely make the correct decisions. He is as much a player in the game, as the rest of the 22 men are. Like how the players make mistakes and get out or bowl poorly and influence the game, so do the umpires, who also influence the match, sometimes through their good judgment, and on other occasions, the lack of it.Asking for error-free umpiring is akin to asking for batsman who never get bowled, or for bowlers who never bowl a bad ball. Its not gonna happen, ever. We need the human element, using technology to make the decisions will destroy greatness of the game. I sincerely request the posters to remove the blinkers on their eyes for once and give this a serious thought.

\ hmm fack no, lets aussies get some rough decision's i might agree. you are tryin to act too smart here mm ;)

[siddhu]

Dont want to seem like blowing my own trumpet, but in this video, Symmonds has said exactly the same thing that i have been shouting my throat hoarse for the last 6 months on this board. Its about time people stop viewing an umpire as an external factor, who there to merely make the correct decisions. He is as much a player in the game, as the rest of the 22 men are. Like how the players make mistakes and get out or bowl poorly and influence the game, so do the umpires, who also influence the match, sometimes through their good judgment, and on other occasions, the lack of it.Asking for error-free umpiring is akin to asking for batsman who never get bowled, or for bowlers who never bowl a bad ball. Its not gonna happen, ever. We need the human element, using technology to make the decisions will destroy greatness of the game. I sincerely request the posters to remove the blinkers on their eyes for once and give this a serious thought.

Good point... But honestly... not buying it. If you can confidently term the mistakes by the umpires as just "mistakes" it is acceptable. But many a times bias is also the reason for this "mistake". (As we have found many a times). Any game marred by bad decisions leave a bad after-taste (even the ones that we won). I, as many other folks pushing for the use of technology, want to enjoy the game for "what it is" rather than "what it could have been" (borrowing from the original post). One bad decision can change the complexion of the game. With the amount of cricket being played, the umpires are also in lot of pressure and would be better if there is some challenge system (3-5 decisions per innings) including LBWs. The worst part is, players do get punished for their mistakes on the field but the umpires don't. The whole complaint department of ICC is nothing but crock. Sourav Ganguly has probably given bad review against Bucknor not less than 3 times in Captains report. but who is umpiring in almost every other India series... Bucknor. Anyway, hoping that we get technology in the picture and we can enjoy the game for "what it really is". And we would have really got there sooner if a certain team had not opposed it... and guess who makes the most noise about the bad decisions, the whole world is against us etc... the same team.

[Guest dada_rocks]

We need the human element, using technology to make the decisions will destroy greatness of the game.

Seriously what greatness is involved in screw-ups I fail to comprehend. Nobody expects them to make correct decision all the time but there is a way out of that human failing. Trumpeting human failing which cud be circumvented as technology as some sort of greatness is ridiculous stand.

[Ram]

Why do the umpires not get dropped then as the players do? And this is again a perfect example of how cricket pundits view use of any technology or challenge as undermining the umpire. It is ultimately going to be less pressure on the umpire too if the right decision is made in close calls with use of these measures. Just as a player is expected to suck it up with a mistake that he has made on the field, the umpires should also be able to accept a reversal of their wrong decisions- to ensure there is not undue stoppage the no. of challenges can be restricted to a few for both teams.

You make an excellent point one one regard : Like how players are held accountable for their performances, so too should be umpires. There must be strict guidelines and standards that need to be maintained, professional training methods for umpires introduced and match conditions and environs simulated in that training. With regards to how we can make this current system more error free, i am tempted to quote one of my previous posts,

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.

In short, in my opinion, we must do all we can to help the umpire to get his decision right, like decreasing his responsibilities on the field and giving him decision making aids such as tram lines on the pitch, but ultimately, he is the one that has to make the decision.

hmm fack no, lets aussies get some rough decision's i might agree. you are tryin to act too smart here mm ;)

Thank you for that VERY polite rebuttal !:haha:

Good point... But honestly... not buying it. If you can confidently term the mistakes by the umpires as just "mistakes" it is acceptable. But many a times bias is also the reason for this "mistake". (As we have found many a times).

Can you prove it ? Thats the thing, its quite easy to make allegations, but much harder to prove it. On face value, i have this answer for you. Do you think boards like BCCI and PCB, which contribute to the lion share of the finances of the ICC will stand and watch silently, if they knew the ICC appointed umpires were biased against them ?

Any game marred by bad decisions leave a bad after-taste (even the ones that we won). I' date=' as many other folks pushing for the use of technology, want to enjoy the game for "what it is" rather than "what it could have been" (borrowing from the original post). One bad decision can change the complexion of the game. With the amount of cricket being played, the umpires are also in lot of pressure and would be better if there is some challenge system (3-5 decisions per innings) including LBWs.[/quote'] Thats the thing you see, you need mindset change to fully understand what i am saying. I repeat, stop viewing the umpire as someone who is there to simply make the right decision all the time. He is as much a player in the match, as anyone else.

The worst part is' date=' players do get punished for their mistakes on the field but the umpires don't. The whole complaint department of ICC is nothing but crock. Sourav Ganguly has probably given bad review against Bucknor not less than 3 times in Captains report. but who is umpiring in almost every other India series... Bucknor.[/quote'] I dont have an answer for this, to be honest. How Bucknor keeps umpiring, despite the drastic fall of his standards is something i cannot understand either. But bear in mind, we have EVERY right to criticize the umpire, but DONT criticize the art of umpiring.

Anyway' date=' hoping that we get technology in the picture and we can enjoy the game for "what it really is". And we would have really got there sooner if a certain team had not opposed it... and guess who makes the most noise about the bad decisions, the whole world is against us etc... the same team.[/quote'] I am all for technology that assists the umpires in his decision making, but ANY move that seeks to reduce his role or in the case of referrals, over-rule his decisions, i will oppose it tooth and nail.

[Ram]

Seriously what greatness is involved in screw-ups I fail to comprehend. Nobody expects them to make correct decision all the time but there is a way out of that human failing. Trumpeting human failing which cud be circumvented as technology as some sort of greatness is ridiculous stand.

No, screw-ups dont increase the greatness of the person who screws up, but it certainly adds to the uncertainty of the game. And if you want technology to circumvent errors in umpiring, then why not use robots instead of human batsman and bowlers ? If that be the case, if we make the best robot, we win all the time right ? And will that be interesting ?

[Anakin]

No, screw-ups dont increase the greatness of the person who screws up, but it certainly adds to the uncertainty of the game. And if you want technology to circumvent errors in umpiring, then why not use robots instead of human batsman and bowlers ? If that be the case, if we make the best robot, we win all the time right ? And will that be interesting ?

That's just the most absurd way of thinking. You let the players fight it out with their skills, not with help from racist blind deaf people. And don't bring up the weather again, because we can not do much about that other than building indoor stadiums.

[Ram]

That's just the most absurd way of thinking. You let the players fight it out with their skills' date=' not with help from racist blind deaf people. And don't bring up the weather again, because we can not do much about that other than building indoor stadiums.[/quote'] I know its an absurd way of thinking and thats why i DIDNT think like that. I was merely responding to another poster's line of thinking. You guys see cricket as a game between two teams where each other skills are matched up against each other, with the result being a fair reflection of who is better and who is worse. I dont see it that way, I see it a visual spectacle, and would want to retain elements within cricket that makes more interesting to watch. Umpiring is certainly one of that. Besides, can you explain not even a single past or present good player has NEVER called for umpires to be replaced by technology ? Can you also, if possible, explain why football continues to allow linesman to make errors while making off-side calls ?

[siddhu]

Can you prove it ? Thats the thing, its quite easy to make allegations, but much harder to prove it. On face value, i have this answer for you. Do you think boards like BCCI and PCB, which contribute to the lion share of the finances of the ICC will stand and watch silently, if they knew the ICC appointed umpires were biased against them ?

Yes, how come repeat offenders like McGrath, Ponting, Warne, Pollock etc (in terms of overappealing, slow over rates etc) keeps getting away... no warning no penalty nothing... But a simple shock reaction from subcontinent players bring bans, penalties and what not. eg. Mike Denness episode in SA. Ganguly getting fined for slow over rates while in the same match ponting gets away. Tendulkar and Kallis cleans the ball, one is fined and the other is not... (don't tell me you don't remember this episode) And according to rules, the umpires have to lodge a complaint for Match Referee to take any action... No complaint no penalty... Then what are the umpires doing if they don't complain against this behavior. If this is not bias, i don't have anything to add to it. Regarding the decisions on the field, I know it works both ways. It can work in out favor or can go against us. But any bad decision definitely leaves bad taste.

Thats the thing you see, you need mindset change to fully understand what i am saying. I repeat, stop viewing the umpire as someone who is there to simply make the right decision all the time. He is as much a player in the match, as anyone else.

Not acceptable. I understand if 50-50 decisions going one way or the other. but blind umpiring (like 1st day at SCG) in my book is simply not acceptable. There has to be an appeals process. Its not fair to both teams.

I dont have an answer for this, to be honest. How Bucknor keeps umpiring, despite the drastic fall of his standards is something i cannot understand either. But bear in mind, we have EVERY right to criticize the umpire, but DONT criticize the art of umpiring.

Not criticizing the art of umpiring, I am talking about IMPROVING the art of umpiring by advocating for use of extra technology. Give the umpires portable LCD TVs so that they can take decision themselves after referring to it. But something must be done against this kind of blind umpiring. We use technology to improve our daily life style, then why not cricket...

[siddhu]

Besides, can you explain not even a single past or present good player has NEVER called for umpires to be replaced by technology ?

Nobody is calling for umpires to be REPLACED, umpires are definitely needed to make decisions. We are just arguing to bring more technology in the field to reduce the "human element" (in your terms) and bring fairplay. It should be skills that should be competing and not luck... And then who are the folks in the commentary box, who keep making noise about introducing more technology in the game... There was a survey couple of years ago, where majority players supported the use of technology. 9 out of 10 test playing nations had agreed to bring more technology in the field, but 1 test playing nation was against it ... our great parosis... which is why it has not been introduced yet.

[yoda]

mm, pls show us where the umpiring factor/efficiency is recorded for every inning. is that a stat most of us have failed to follow?

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[Guest dada_rocks]

No, screw-ups dont increase the greatness of the person who screws up, but it certainly adds to the uncertainty of the game. And if you want technology to circumvent errors in umpiring, then why not use robots instead of human batsman and bowlers ? If that be the case, if we make the best robot, we win all the time right ? And will that be interesting ?

I don't know any robot like that, moreover why it has to be either one or another either robot or fallible human.. there is middle ground u know.. Players calibre is being tested and it's pity that quirky umpires vetos their calibre .. It's not the umpiring competetion it's cricket competetion happening out there ..

[Guest dada_rocks]

Referral has not marred other games wonder why people fear so much when it comes to cricket.. I don't watch game to see how often a fcuknor had brain-fart anyway