A standardised DRS would improve the game, and could see a return to the use of home umpires, says Chris Knight.
The Decision Review System in international cricket is causing the role of on-field umpire to become increasingly redundant. Umpires are being second-guessed at every turn and the lack of a standardised DRS is creating disparities between series and even greater confusion when it comes to decision making.
The variations in the use of DRS worldwide continues to undermine its credibility, as the BCCI continues to dig its heels in. India remain dubious about the ball tracking element of DRS and are unlikely to accept it until proved 100 per cent accurate, while other countries are hamstrung by the cost of implementing it.
The main role of DRS is to overturn any howlers the on-field umpire makes, but it’s the inconsistency of third umpires’ use of DRS that continues to cause problems. The third day of the first Test between Pakistan and England is an example. The dismissal of Andrew Strauss caught behind was upheld on the basis of the third umpire hearing a ‘wooden noise’, despite no evidence of an edge on Hot Spot. On other occasions the absence of an edge on Hot Spot has been used to overturn a decision. That Strauss incident followed Saeed Ajmal’s dismissal, when bizarrely the offspinner couldn’t be saved by Hot Spot because his stride forward had taken him out of the camera frame.
Such incidents raise question marks over the value of DRS and leave us with a non-standardised system worldwide. Meanwhile, some umpires are becoming over reliant on technology by unnecessarily checking clear cut run outs and no balls. The aura of the umpire is being stripped away by DRS and the notion that the umpire’s decision is final has been tarnished. Players are questioning the umpire for the wrong reasons and it is creating a dangerous precedent.
Simon Taufel, the Australian widely touted as the best umpire in the world, recently said: “I think we’re creating an environment where it is okay for a player to question an umpire’s decision, and that doesn’t sit comfortably with me. As a player I was always taught to accept the umpire’s decision and get on with the game. I think we’re breaking that down a little bit.”
Questioning of umpires’ decisions was one of the main reasons for introducing neutral umpires, first used during India’s tour of the West Indies in 2002. Ten years on, are we now moving towards a situation where DRS has negated the need for neutral match officials?
Mike Haysman, the South African commentator, is a strong advocate for the return of home umpires as DRS has ensured that players can question any dubious (as well as clear cut) calls. The return of home umpires would certainly help to cut down the increasing travel demands on officials and Taufel has highlighted the pressures of the role. “Probably the biggest disadvantage in our side of the sport is the amount of time you spend away from home. If you look at the average profile of the new elite panel umpire coming through and you look at the average profile of the panel members in 2011, they’re in their 40s, they’ve got two or three kids, and they’ve got a reasonable, good job with their home board or in private enterprise. We have to look at ways to support those guys and keep them in the game.”
Before home umpires can realistically be considered again, DRS needs to be standardised for every Test series and the way third umpires interpret the evidence of technology needs to be more consistent. The on-field umpires are generally shown to be correct when decisions are reviewed but if players continue to undermine them then we risk alienating the umpires.
Umpires could help themselves though, by using the third umpire to focus on line decisions like no balls and leave the on-field officials to focus on the game. The use of technology to help improve decision making can only be a good thing, but using that technology properly can ensure that the umpire’s decision is indeed final.
Read Chris Knight’s views on David Morgan’s proposals for county cricket.
DRS Could Bring Umpires Home
A standardised DRS would improve the game, and could see a return to the use of home umpires, says Chris Knight.
The Decision Review System in international cricket is causing the role of on-field umpire to become increasingly redundant. Umpires are being second-guessed at every turn and the lack of a standardised DRS is creating disparities between series and even greater confusion when it comes to decision making.
The variations in the use of DRS worldwide continues to undermine its credibility, as the BCCI continues to dig its heels in. India remain dubious about the ball tracking element of DRS and are unlikely to accept it until proved 100 per cent accurate, while other countries are hamstrung by the cost of implementing it.
The main role of DRS is to overturn any howlers the on-field umpire makes, but it’s the inconsistency of third umpires’ use of DRS that continues to cause problems. The third day of the first Test between Pakistan and England is an example. The dismissal of Andrew Strauss caught behind was upheld on the basis of the third umpire hearing a ‘wooden noise’, despite no evidence of an edge on Hot Spot. On other occasions the absence of an edge on Hot Spot has been used to overturn a decision. That Strauss incident followed Saeed Ajmal’s dismissal, when bizarrely the offspinner couldn’t be saved by Hot Spot because his stride forward had taken him out of the camera frame.
Such incidents raise question marks over the value of DRS and leave us with a non-standardised system worldwide. Meanwhile, some umpires are becoming over reliant on technology by unnecessarily checking clear cut run outs and no balls. The aura of the umpire is being stripped away by DRS and the notion that the umpire’s decision is final has been tarnished. Players are questioning the umpire for the wrong reasons and it is creating a dangerous precedent.
Simon Taufel, the Australian widely touted as the best umpire in the world, recently said: “I think we’re creating an environment where it is okay for a player to question an umpire’s decision, and that doesn’t sit comfortably with me. As a player I was always taught to accept the umpire’s decision and get on with the game. I think we’re breaking that down a little bit.”
Questioning of umpires’ decisions was one of the main reasons for introducing neutral umpires, first used during India’s tour of the West Indies in 2002. Ten years on, are we now moving towards a situation where DRS has negated the need for neutral match officials?
Mike Haysman, the South African commentator, is a strong advocate for the return of home umpires as DRS has ensured that players can question any dubious (as well as clear cut) calls. The return of home umpires would certainly help to cut down the increasing travel demands on officials and Taufel has highlighted the pressures of the role. “Probably the biggest disadvantage in our side of the sport is the amount of time you spend away from home. If you look at the average profile of the new elite panel umpire coming through and you look at the average profile of the panel members in 2011, they’re in their 40s, they’ve got two or three kids, and they’ve got a reasonable, good job with their home board or in private enterprise. We have to look at ways to support those guys and keep them in the game.”
Before home umpires can realistically be considered again, DRS needs to be standardised for every Test series and the way third umpires interpret the evidence of technology needs to be more consistent. The on-field umpires are generally shown to be correct when decisions are reviewed but if players continue to undermine them then we risk alienating the umpires.
Umpires could help themselves though, by using the third umpire to focus on line decisions like no balls and leave the on-field officials to focus on the game. The use of technology to help improve decision making can only be a good thing, but using that technology properly can ensure that the umpire’s decision is indeed final.
Read Chris Knight’s views on David Morgan’s proposals for county cricket.