By Dr V.V.Giri
What a mess!! ICC now looks like a clown with the modified UDRS in the recently concluded World Cup in the sub-continent.
The Umpires review System was a great success in test matches. Even the UDRS haters like Sachin and Dhoni were benefitted by this and have accepted it ICC too enjoyed great support and announced the implementation of the Review System for the WC.
Every player, spectator felt umpiring in cricket was becoming near fool proof with the Review System, until the ICC tampered with it in this WC. I don’t know why they should meddle (or call it alter, modify, innovate) with it. When it was going on perfectly well in test matches, I really do not understand why they should make changes and confuse every one. I think in this WC also, they should have continued the same as in tests.
All the countries agreed to use this as they were getting uniform justice without the varied human errors. They preferred to leave it to the technology which, if not hundred percent perfect, at least, uniform to all teams and consistent with the program made earlier.
In the test series, if the batsman or the bowling captain felt the umpire could be wrong - that is, when they felt the decision made through the naked eyes could not be correct, they requested for the referrals. The on field umpires, in turn, ask the third umpire who is also equally qualified to view it in slow motion in different angles and also use the ‘hawk eye’ / ‘snicko meter’s help and give the verdict.
Once again I repeat, we do not know whether the technology is fully correct or not. But we all know for sure that it is consistent and uniform for all teams. The third umpire after going viewing the video film gives the verdict.
On field umpire, either changes his decision or negative the appeal according to the third umpire’s decision and signals the sides. Batsman was happy, the bowling captain was also happy and everyone is happy.
Now, according to the modifications, in the case of a LBW decision, the third umpire after viewing the re-plays and slow motion acts conveys the existing factors to the on field umpire.
The third umpire is not allowed to use the hawk eye option of what would have happened after the impact. He just mentions the area where the ball pitched. That is the line & length, whether there was a contact with the bat and the ‘no ball’ aspect.
The on field umpire then takes these factors into consideration and makes a decision. The question of whether the ball would have hit the stumps is still being decided by the on field umpire. The real technology help is not utilized in this modified review system. It is again the umpire’s call and again continues to have the same problems faced earlier. The advantage of using slow motions, hawk eye and different angle cameras are not taken in to consideration.
In this WC we noticed many LBW decisions go on the wrong way even after reviewing through technology. After the UDRS decision, we were shown the hawk eye results which contradicted the umpires decision.
We witnessed some horrible decisions of using 2.5 meters distance (of point of impact) inconsistently. Some batsmen were given not out when the point of impact was beyond the said distance but, some were given out for the same reason.
This is absurd. When you have the technology, go with it fully. Do not allow human error as much as possible. There was no necessity for ICC to spoil the existing Review System technology and procedures.
If this adulteration continues, players will lose faith in UDRS and will opine against the system which again will take us back to square one.
No comments:
Post a Comment