|
|
 |
 |
 |
| Saturday, 04 September 2004 |
 |
|
 |
Sports | |
| News Business Features Editorial Security Politics World Letters Sports Obituaries
|
TV and the umpire As long as television technology is on the crease and available to viewers around the world, there will forever be a debate on whether the cricket umpire is right or wrong in his decision-making and subject to vilification from all and sundry. The latest allegation on umpiring against one of the most respected cricket umpires David Shepherd of England by former Pakistan wicket-keeper and present chairman of selectors Wasim Bari is nothing new. Bari cannot be taken to task by the guidelines laid down by the International Cricket Council's (ICC) Code of Conduct because he falls beyond its jurisdiction. The rules apply only if you are a part of the national team, which Bari is not. Incensed by his country coming so close to beating Australia in the Videocon Cup one-day triangular final in Amstelveen, Holland, Bari took his frustrations on umpire Shepherd who made two 'bloomers' against top ranked Pakistani batsmen skipper Inzamam-ul-Haq and Yousuf Youhanna which resulted in Australia squeezing home by 17 runs in a taut final. Bari called for 63-year-old Shepherd to retire saying his 'umpiring decisions were like target killing and cost Pakistan the final.' "It's time for the inaccurate Shepherd to retire. His decisions were not only doubtful but disgraceful." Another Pakistan commentator Omer Kureishi said that Shepherd had crossed his retiring age and as an old man his judgement in the final was very poor. This was not the first time that Shepherd had come under fire in a series involving Pakistan. In 2001 Shepherd's umpiring was called into question during Pakistan's tour of England in 2001. An array of missed no-balls that resulted in wickets led the chairman of the Association of Cricket Umpires and Scorers (UK) to label the officiating a 'disgrace'. He said that the umpires should be physically and mentally fit and be able to concentrate as hard on the last hour of the match as if it were the first and added that if umpires went through ACUS training, there would be no need for the further use of technology to aid them. Sixty is unofficially made to be the retiring age for umpires, but according to the European Union Regulations, the ICC cannot force an umpire out of cricket because of the age factor. Not so long ago when another English umpire Dickie Bird began making glaring mistakes with due respect to him the England and Wales Cricket Board (ECB) retired him from the game with a farewell Test. The time maybe up for 'Old Shep' who has been a very colourful and popular figure in the game to put his feet up and let the younger guys handle the pressures of modern day cricket. In the present context umpires never had it so good. Being a member of the ICC's elite panel elevates an umpire to five-star status with enough of fringe benefits, which no umpire will want to miss out on. The game has become such a money-spinner globally that the ICC is in a position to look after the umpires as well as its match referees with everything paid for. With such never dreamt of benefits, say 20 years ago, the temptation to linger longer in the game and make the most of it is human nature. Critics argue that if umpires enjoy such luxurious benefits they deserve what they get for making mistakes in the middle. However umpires have come in for so much criticism in the recent past because of the advancement of television technology. It has its plusses and minuses. The plusses are that it can be used to help the umpire to determine several line decisions or the fairness of a catch. The negative aspect of it is that the TV commentators pass judgement on umpiring decisions on lbw and catches behind the wicket after watching several replays (which the onfield umpire does not have the benefit of) thus creating an opinion on the viewer that the umpire is biased. With the commentary team comprising several past and reputed Test cricketers the viewer is led to believe that their judgement is the correct one. Who would dare question the opinions expressed by say Ian Chappell, Greg Chappell, Michael Holding, Sunil Gavaskar, Ravi Shastri, Ian Botham, Tony Greig to name a few. There are also flaws involved in showing the third umpire or commentators calling for a replay of certain incidents or decisions. The entire operation is in the hands of the TV producer. He can manipulate or do anything he wants with the slow motion replays or the mat technology, which determines where the ball has pitched for an lbw decision. He can show what he wants and cut out the rest, which may bring about an inaccurate point of view and victimize the poor umpire or player. It is happening in present day cricket and no one can do a damn thing about it because the game thrives on television sponsorship. Headline Our sports headline 'There is life without Murali - Mahela' on Thursday has caused a great deal of discontent amongst our readers and Mahela Jayawardene in particular. We would like to clarify here that it was not meant to belittle Jayawardene or Muralitharan or the readers, but given without any prejudice. Our sincere apologies to those who were personally affected by it. |
|
News | Business | Features
| Editorial | Security
Produced by Lake House |
