.comment-link {margin-left:.6em;}

Sight Screen

Monday, September 26, 2005

By the way...

Enough already -- every word that could possibly be said (and a lot of words that should not have been said) appears to have been said, and written, in media outlets across the country; time now to step back and await the noises coming out of the review committee tomorrow.
For me, time to go do what I earn my bread and butter doing -- but before that, thought I'd toss a couple of interesting articles into your in-tray for consideration.
Ray White, the former chief of the South African cricket board, figures it is time for video replays to play a larger role in the adjudication of appeals of various kinds. It's worth a read, and one particular bit in it underlines a long-standing grouse of mine:
I also think that it is unfair on the umpires and embarrassing for them that everyone else watching the game has the benefit of replays and they do not, except for line decisions.

Exactly. Consider this: A Test is being played at the Gardens; the noise is so intense you can't hear yourself think. Huge appeal for caught behind, but the poor umpire never heard the nick (Remember the last Ashes Test? The clear caught behind not given, in England's second innings?). He can't ask for the third umpire's take on this -- not allowed. So he plays safe, and rules the batsman in.
The fielding team is stunned. They gather around, looking up at the giant screen where, within seconds, the replay, complete with snickometer, shows up and clearly indicates the umpire goofed.
So the poor goof has to stand there, knowing the fielding side thinks he's cheated them; the batsman's thinking thank god they got this deaf and dumb bloke to stand in this game, here is where I cash in; the crowd thinks he is a dork.
Everyone got to use technology -- except the umpire, who needed it most. Tell me how it makes sense? Tell me, too, how come Sunny Gavaskar, wearing the hat of commentator, reacts to an on-field appeal with 'I'd like to take a closer look at that', and pontificates on the rightness or otherwise of the decision after watching a half dozen replays; but wearing his hat of chairman of the technology committee, the same Sunny G decides replays are not yet proven evidence, and there is no real need to let umpires refer to them?

6 Comments:

  • One Compromise formula being worked out in the Dalmiya room .., SG will step down for 3-4 months (in the interest of Indian Cricket or something like that) that is till the Pakistan tour. The guess is Pakistan tour going to be a disastrous one and GC’s head will roll. Sourav will make a comeback with a new coach .

    By Blogger PODI, at 18:38  

  • podi.. sounds good... but this would work only if SG can find a place for himself in the side with SRT coming back sooner or later.

    By Blogger Kannan, at 18:50  

  • Prem,

    You are in fine form mate! Another wondeful post from you...thanks!

    On another note, can the cricket fans undertake a PIL regarding who leaked GC's email? Can some sort of investigation be conducted for the public?

    By Blogger rp, at 18:51  

  • kannan,

    That is the one good Problem SRT coming back but the other problem right now is convincing the Sourav’s sponsors: should agree to this otherwise a heavy financial loss for Sourav.

    By Blogger PODI, at 18:54  

  • To be fair, Sunny is not the only one in a decision-/opinion-making role who still has some reluctance about technology. Some old timers still want to keep it the way it was, conveniently ignoring the fact that the game has evolved quite a bit. Remember reading a while back that the technology still has some kinks esp. regarding LBWs, but you've got to think the false positives and false negatives will drastically reduce with an immediate video review of all dismissals. I guess the process of initiating a review needs to be worked out -- there was some concern that a review of each appeal is likely to slow/bore the game. All it proves is that as usual Cricket is behind several other sports in the rate of evolution to provide better and more engaging entertainment. I also think having Team 2 start its innings after Team 1 finishes it fully is not a fair deal, esp. in ODIs. I think a baseball like system of 5 innings of 10 overs each per side would minimize the impact of the toss and make it fairer wrt weather, pitch, D/N conditions and would help do away arbitary D-L calculations.

    By Blogger mip_co, at 19:22  

  • If I remember, umpires will be given video assistance, as a trial in the coming Super series in Australia.

    http://sport.guardian.co.uk/cricket/story/0,10069,1561256,00.html?gusrc=rss

    By Blogger Chandan, at 00:26  

Post a Comment

<< Home