Technology...how much??
Going through the third game of the super series, I am inclined to believe, the game would be better off with the limited use of technology. Some of the innovations used in this series have done nothing to add value. It only has added more subjectivity to a game where many subjective factors are already there. Look at the way umpires handled LBW decision in this game. I can remember four appeals. Two were clearly out. Ponting to Ntini and Murali to Watson. But umpires neither gave them out nor referred to third umpire. Two were clearly not-out (I don't remember details) And what do umpires do?... Refer to the third umpire. This is absurd. We had four mistakes in a single game with so much of technology in place. Another incident which made mockery of cricket was the No-ball decision. For the first time, a no-ball was given after a wicket was taken. What about those no-balls which were not given and also did not have wickets.
What are the umpires' role from now in the field? Is it just standing there and signalling no balls, fours and sixes occasionally. Or taking bowlers' caps and sweaters? Probably, some day we will see umpires who could give cards to cricketers or even be trained enough to treat injured cricketers.
Not only are we adding more subjectivity, we are wasting so much of time. Someday, an umpire might decide to refer every single appeal to third umpire to avoid any errors. Then what? We will have half an hour for these decisions only.
So, what is the solution. We can not go with the umpiring errors also. Well, I have two suggestions.
1. Why can't we have twenty class umpires who would not make many mistakes. I mean it should be posiible if there is some really good program to produce them. Why can't ICC have professional courses on umpiring. They could promote umpiring at all levels, bring expertise, train new umpires etc..I mean it should not be impossible to produce some 20 excellent umpires from around the world, if ICC really wants that.
2. Line decisons like no-balls can be supported by technology. We can have more viodeo cameras like in champions trophy last year. For every no-ball, there should be an instantaneous flash on the screen or a sound alarm to on-field umpires. I beleieve that is not impossible if ICC wants.
Instead of going for more technology, it is the way it is used that is important.
What are the umpires' role from now in the field? Is it just standing there and signalling no balls, fours and sixes occasionally. Or taking bowlers' caps and sweaters? Probably, some day we will see umpires who could give cards to cricketers or even be trained enough to treat injured cricketers.
Not only are we adding more subjectivity, we are wasting so much of time. Someday, an umpire might decide to refer every single appeal to third umpire to avoid any errors. Then what? We will have half an hour for these decisions only.
So, what is the solution. We can not go with the umpiring errors also. Well, I have two suggestions.
1. Why can't we have twenty class umpires who would not make many mistakes. I mean it should be posiible if there is some really good program to produce them. Why can't ICC have professional courses on umpiring. They could promote umpiring at all levels, bring expertise, train new umpires etc..I mean it should not be impossible to produce some 20 excellent umpires from around the world, if ICC really wants that.
2. Line decisons like no-balls can be supported by technology. We can have more viodeo cameras like in champions trophy last year. For every no-ball, there should be an instantaneous flash on the screen or a sound alarm to on-field umpires. I beleieve that is not impossible if ICC wants.
Instead of going for more technology, it is the way it is used that is important.
posted by Ravi Agrawal at
3:54 AM
2 Comments:
Yule:
You take time out from your precious 24 hours to read my comments and react to them.
You call me useless and stupid; yet you read my comments and react to them. What does that make you, my friend??
A FYI: I don't give any opinions on the main blog page, I merely put articles from different sites there. I give my opinions in the comment section; like you and everyone else. So, what seems to be the problem here??
By
Unknown, at 15:47
rajam:
Since Dravid is not there, Kaif seems to be the next, and only, logical choice of captain in the seniors team.
The composition of team is such that there is no other choice, apart from Sachin.
I think that, at best, Sachin would have been asked to captain the side as a mere formality, out of courtesey for him. Sachin would never accept any captaincy, other than that Mumbai team. Because he doen't want it and also because he would not want to start a wildfire of rumor of him vying for captaincy in future.
Endresult: Kaif is asked to captain the side since he is the only one available, other than Sachin; who wouldn't accept it anyways.
Actually, this is a very good opportunity for Kaif to show his captaincy skills. He was the captain of U-19 team that won U-19 world cup. If India seniors win the trophy then it will be another feather in his cap, which he can use later when the post of captain of national side is up for grabs.
By
Unknown, at 17:57
Post a Comment
<< Home