D-7
It’s matter of just 2.5 meters. May not be huge or not having any importance in our day to day life but it can be a huge between having two points or ending up with one instead at the end of an all important world cup game. Or having lesser threatening opponent rather then a strong one during quarter finals. But who cares? Certainly not the ICC. Like few parental sporting bodies, ICC too thinks what they decide is final and will go smoothly when implementing it.
“UDRS” or in other words “Umpire’s Decision Review System” is certainly looks like a farce after famous Kevin Pietersen dismissal and Punter’s out burst and then two latest incidents of Ian Bell and Elton Chigumbura. It was first used during Sri Lanka Vs India series in 2007-08. Indians were over smarted by their Lankan counterparts in that series when it came to using it properly and since then BCCI and Indian players particularly Sachin Tendulkar and Mahedrasingh Dhoni are against it. Now these two as we know are the biggest names you can ever encounter within current Indian cricket structure. Sachin as usual remained silent in public against this but must have conveyed strong opposition to the BCCI. Dhoni on the other hand has been very vocal against this. His funda is simple. “If you do not have full proof system, better not to use it.” He has even given example of a life jacket during India’s tour of South Africa, when Indians chose not to use UDRS for which Protease were very keen. He said, “You can’t wear expensive life saving jacket which doesn’t have guarantee to save your life and jump into deep sea.”
There is a support for this too. Especially from those who don’t have an apatite for BCCI’s might in world cricket. There is Tony Greig, the known biased critic of Indian cricket and cricketers and who was also part of commentary team of that disastrous tour of 2007-08 to Sri Lanka when UDRS was used for the first time, always takes a dig against BCCI, when ever a mistake by an on field umpire been undone with the help of UDRS. Time and again since the introduction of this, when ever India has travelled abroad and refused to co operate on this issue with home board, mostly the home captains and biased critics like Greig comes out in open and bash BCCI for not accepting or supporting the technology, when it’s available. They even don’t forget to point out the need of it when Indians suffer from certain decision by a human error by on field umpires. But why a human error should not be a part of the game? No body lives or wants to live in a perfect world!! Why should we have a technology with plenty of loopholes just for the sake of having it?
Let’s go through some examples in recent time. The first loophole came in public when in an Ashes test, Kevin Pietersen was ruled not out by on field umpire Aleem Dar. Upon requesting the review, the first replay showed there was a definite nick but the most trusted tool for this system, “The Hotspot” didn’t show any thing on KP’s bat! The decision was upheld by the third umpire and KP got reprieve. Punter had heated discussion with Dar, which was destined to be futile. So this is the first impression we got that its not full proof, as Dhoni has suggested. Hotspot was meant to get near perfect decision, but here it didn’t worked and third umpire also gone with rulebook and didn’t used his common sense by going through original replays carefully which suggested there was a nick and there was no day light between the ball and the bat. If hotspot doesn’t work then what else will?
The bombshell dropped just last Sunday when Ian Bell was not given out in the most thrilling match of this world cup. It was question of 2.5 meters. The rule says that you are not out if the difference between impact and stumps is more then 2.5 meters. That precisely what happened in Ian Bell’s case, on field umpire Billy Bowden gave him not out because Bell was way too forward and had enough doubt whether it will hit the stumps or not. Ok, agreed. Same thing but with different result happened in Ahmedabad on Friday with Elton Chigumbura, when on filed umpire Marais Erasmus gave him out despite Elton was dancing down the pitch and difference between impact and stumps here was also more then 2.5 meters . This time on field umpire thought it would go on and hit the stumps and same third umpire, Rod Tucker, who was doing the same duty in Bangalore, again left the decision to the on field umpire and Erasmus stood with his original decision and gave Chigumbura out.
The simple question here is, “Why we use technology?” The answer would be, “to reduce the errors”. “Did these two examples helped in reducing the errors?” The answer certainly is “No”. If it’s not helping then why to stick with it and not only sticking but even pushing for it? For me 2.5 meters difference can certainly put a doubt in on filed umpire’s mind, because he is human and can’t be sure, but when its referred to the technology, the hawkeye, and its giving you the correct decision that despite the travel would be more then 2.5 meters, its gonna crashing into the stumps, I don’t know what stops third umpire from using their head and give the batsman out? The thing stops umpires is the ICC rule book, which suggests that if the difference is more then 2.5 meters as per “Hawkeye”, it can’t be given out!! So in other words you are using the technology to amend the mistakes but at the end of it you are running away from amending it. “Sigh!! “
The other debating point here is why can’t the game have human errors? Yes some decisions struck at very wrong time, but certainly not every time. The fiasco at Sydney few years back has not been repeated since. The ICC statistics them selves reveal that decisions made by on field umpires, years to years have precision of more then 95 to 98 percent. Does that mean ICC itself doesn’t believe in its own stats? Yes we all like to have correct decision all time to make game perfect, but as I said who lives in a perfect world any way?
But In the process of making things perfect you can’t force an imperfect system which raises more problems. ICC could have used this in English and/or Australian domestic circuit where they have broadcast of almost all the matches and then after filling the loopholes they could have installed it into big stage. This process would have taken few years but who was in a hurry apart from the ICC? It’s sure that India, with plenty of doubts already and now after these two dubious decisions within span of four days will not be lured by ICC in next year or so any how, so why not we review this entire system instead?
Dessert Storm
“There should not be adulteration of technology with human thinking”
- M.S.Dhoni at a press conference after tied ODI between India and England at Bengaluru.
