Referrals will not be used

[Burgey]

According to this morning's news.

I smell a rat here. Next thing they'll announce a lifting of the ban on mints. The Poms are trying to re-visit 2005 here.

 

[Richard]

Referrals will not be used

 

[Richard]

Next thing they'll announce a lifting of the ban on mints.

No need, you can't lift a ban on something that's never going to be remotely possible to ban ITFP.

 

[andyc]

Huge picture

Yeah, can't wait for the series to be decided on ****house umpiring. AFAIC, from the moment the system was introduced, any series that didn't have referrals was just hindering its progress. It's only going to get better by being trialled worldwide, not by being used in what seems to be completely randomly picked series.

 

[Richard]

These referrals are one of those things that people (at least, those willing to watch and see and not know what they want to see beforehand) tend to like the idea of more than the reality. It sounds great, eliminating errors, but in reality all it does is introduce one hell of a lot of utterly confusing crap and maybe eliminates the odd error here and there. If anything, there've been more errors in the Tests I've watched with it than might've been the case without - and there've been one or two patently obvious blunders that still haven't been overturned as well. I think the series will be far, far more enjoyable without this utterly needless complication than it would be with it so thus I'm damn grateful it's been got shot of. I just hope it soon becomes permanent.

BTW, at your quote-simplification.

 

[pasag]

The implementation of the referral system has been so poorly handled, but I guess that's to be expected of cricket's administration.

To go from playing with referrals to without them (and then back again come the next series) in the space of one series is ridiculous.

 

[Pratters]

Farce.

 

[Uppercut]

The implementation of the referral system has been so poorly handled, but I guess that's to be expected of cricket's administration.

To go from playing with referrals to without them (and then back again come the next series) in the space of one series is ridiculous.

In fairness to them though, the whole thing is being officially introduced in October, and IMO they've got it spot on in the long run:

"The protocols were clear, maybe the application was not so good," said Lorgat. "It's the really bad errors we want to eliminate. We had a fair amount of feedback from players and most of it was positive. They accept the fundamental thing that we want to get decisions right."

Good system, poorly handled. I expected them to back up the umpires no matter what, but i'm quite pleased they've come out and told it like it is. With the conclusion they've come to, I'm happy to forgive them a few teething problems.

 

[Burgey]

No need, you can't lift a ban on something that's never going to be remotely possible to ban ITFP.

Noticed Gower, Bothan et al gushing over England having the one fella shining the pill to assist with reverse swing. They said "Trescothick used to be the one".

Not a mention of the mints scandal of course. They really are trying to turn it into 2005 all over again. Won't work, IMO.

 

[Julian87]

I am glad they won't be in use.

 

[Athlai]

Yeah farcical.

 

[superkingdave]

Would have had them just for the batting side, 2 referrals, decision only reversed in LBW's where bat is involved(Damien Martyn) or ball pitched outside leg stump.

 

[Goughy]

Seems a bit silly. I guess we have done without it for over 100 years and it had been a failure when introduced, but it is hard to go back once this was out of the bottle.

 

[Richard]

Noticed Gower, Bothan et al gushing over England having the one fella shining the pill to assist with reverse swing. They said "Trescothick used to be the one".

Not a mention of the mints scandal of course. They really are trying to turn it into 2005 all over again. Won't work, IMO.

Should do so easily. The only thing that is certain is that some Aussies will moan about it pointlessly again.

 

[howardj]

These referrals are one of those things that people (at least, those willing to watch and see and not know what they want to see beforehand) tend to like the idea of more than the reality. It sounds great, eliminating errors, but in reality all it does is introduce one hell of a lot of utterly confusing crap and maybe eliminates the odd error here and there. If anything, there've been more errors in the Tests I've watched with it than might've been the case without - and there've been one or two patently obvious blunders that still haven't been overturned as well. I think the series will be far, far more enjoyable without this utterly needless complication than it would be with it so thus I'm damn grateful it's been got shot of. I just hope it soon becomes permanent.

BTW, at your quote-simplification.

Not meant to eliminate errors, just improve the overall percentage of correct decisions.

That there's been more errors, I doubt there actually has, is down to the ****house television umpire, not the technology.

TV umpires give technology a bad name.

Pay me half price and I'll do it from my lounge chair.

 

[Richard]

I don't really care why there've been more errors - due to inadequte Umpires, poor stipulation of the way the thing is to be applied, bad camerawork and technology or whatever. The fact is the referral system has made the game look utterly ridiculous and I'll be glad to be shot of it for the duration of the biggest series in my calendar.