It was not that long ago that India almost called off a tour in Australia and the spirit of men like Michael Clark and Ricky Ponting was questioned in one of the most heated and exhilarating tour played Down Under. When the dust settled and the series was etched in the footnotes of cricketing folklore one statement created tremors that had the world taking notice of the serious issue at hand. When Indian Test Captain Anil Kumble, a man who is considered one of the finest ambassadors of the sports said, “Only one team played the game in right spirit” after the Sydney Test, the world knew that change was soon to arrive.
The fact that much of the fiasco could have been avoided had the third umpire been allowed to play a more pro-active role was a universal opinion echoed by all irrespective of their national identities. International players today earn in millions and with the amount of many invested in sport and the irrational passions that surround it, ‘Batsman Walking’ when they knick it is almost redundant. Very few walk and I myself feel that there is no need to as sometimes you get the rough side of decisions and this evens it out. But with a couple of dozen cameras to capture everything from light and sound to even heat and vibrations a bad decision from the umpires in middle is amplified and made an issue of national importance by overzealous modern media.
It is only fair at this point that we give the umpires the same advantage as we receive with all the camera trickery. With the Sri Lanka-India Test Series currently going on being a great trend-setter for the system of ‘Reviewing Umpiring Decisions’, it seems better sense has prevailed. But there are already whispers that the Indian captain is unhappy about the L.B.W decisions that go to referral. So let us take a look at that and the system in general.
There is no doubt that the system needs to stay and much like in Tennis where each player is allowed to ask for 3 right referrals, same is the case here for each team. But there are complexities in cricket which Tennis is not accustomed to. While the system is great in regards to the Knicks and grassing of catches, the use of it for LBW is a bit uncertain. The reason for that being that a camera will not show you what exactly happens to a ball and degree of the effect once it hits the turf. The decision of LBW probably is a lot better if left to the on-field umpire and maybe you can ask the third umpire only if there was bat involved in it. Beyond that it is much better to leave it to the on-field umpires and leave it to their best judgment.
Cricketers must remember that no game is error free and even an organization like FIFA shot down idea of using TV cameras for the offside rule. In that sense, the governing body of world cricket is too flexible. (Or weak, depending on the case involved). What this guarantees though is that there are no more cases like Andrew Symonds in the SCG Test but the technology is by no means fool-proof. Both AB de Villiers and Michael Vaughan claimed catches that were referred to the television umpire recently. Hopefully though, the system will encourage bowlers to appeal less and batsman to walk more since they will look damn stupid when they hit it and do not walk and are subsequently given out.
It adds further drama to the game and while I do not like the traditional format being tinkered with, this is a positive move indeed. Just leave the LBW decision out unless you hit the ball and it should work fine. For those who crib that it will slow down the game... Oh come on! There has not been a team that completed 90 overs in a day in the last 10 years consistently. It just takes 6 extra minutes in an innings at most and that is one Shoaib Akhtar delivery! Maybe a couple...
