Referral System claims its first victim

[zaremba]

Funny how that's applied so many times. Makes me think it's just a stupid set of rules that are incredibly difficult to read properly (perhaps because there is no way to make an obvious "proper"), and that a simpler set of rules that would create more accurate decisions with less controversy would be preferable.

In fact I've thought that since before this referral nonsense was even instigated.

Hopefully some melodramatic reactions like this might get the thing chucked out of the 11th floor window like another of ICC's idiotic ideas, the Supersub, was - eventually.

A strained analogy, because the supersub was agreed by everyone to be a dreadful idea, whereas the referral system is a good idea with wide support. The dissenting voices are in the minority, and rarely have anything more coherent to say than "But look! There are still some inaccurate decisions!"

TBF to you Richard your objections are a touch more sophisticated than that, but I still think you're wrong. I'm delighted to say that, subject only to incremental evolutionary development, the referral system is here to stay.

 

[Top_Cat]

Yep, agreed. Referrals aren't going anywhere.

 

[Uppercut]

A strained analogy, because the supersub was agreed by everyone to be a dreadful idea, whereas the referral system is a good idea with wide support. The dissenting voices are in the minority, and rarely have anything more coherent to say than "But look! There are still some inaccurate decisions!"

TBF to you Richard your objections are a touch more sophisticated than that, but I still think you're wrong. I'm delighted to say that, subject only to incremental evolutionary development, the referral system is here to stay.

There are a lot of objections to the referral system, ranging from decent points like how it holds up the game to odd objections like how it might hurt the umpire's pride a bit. While the whole thing's anything but perfect, I can't for the life of me see how anyone could conclude that it does more harm than good and it generally feels a bit like resistance to change for the sake of resistance to change; innate conservatism. A lot of the objections are very fair indeed, but surely the benefits outweigh them significantly?

Of course, other objections are bollocks. My personal least-favourite is the "mistakes will still happen, therefore we should just let a far greater proportion of mistakes happen."

 

[zaremba]

And as we speak we're treated to another stream of invective from The Champion Of The Spirit Of The Game - and Doug Bollinger - as the first referral of the 2nd innings is turned down.

 

[Uppercut]

Great decision from Rauf itfp too.

 

[silentstriker]

And as we speak we're treated to another stream of invective from The Champion Of The Spirit Of The Game - and Doug Bollinger - as the first referral of the 2nd innings is turned down.

Haha, love how Ponting always goes on about the Spirit of the Game. Not that I blame him for doing what he does, if it works for his team, but it's funny listening to him at interviews afterward. It's like two different people.

 

[zaremba]

Yep if Snicko is to be believed it was a great decision. Watching it live I thought it was definitely out, there was a big noise as the bat hit the pad.

1-0 to the referral system so far this morning. I dread to think how the enraged chimp* would have reacted had there been no referral available to him.


* (c) Scaly Piscine 2009

 

[Furball]

The reason it's not as popular as it should be is because the West Indies (particularly) and Australia have largely used their appeals frivolously.

The system is there in order that absolute shockers (I'm thinking Damien Martyn at Old Trafford in 05, Katich the next (?) Test, and Sangakkara at Hobart in 07) can be eradicated from the game.

 

[Streetwise]

Haha, love how Ponting always goes on about the Spirit of the Game. Not that I blame him for doing what he does, if it works for his team, but it's funny listening to him at interviews afterward. It's like two different people.

Yeah its a bit like India, first they complain that the umpires are biased and threaten to walk out on a tour then when they get the refferals they complain its biased against them. To top it all off they then refuse to implement the referral system against Sri Lanka and when Sri Lanka cop some bad decisions India claims its all part of the game.

 

[Sir Alex]

Yeah its a bit like India, first they complain that the umpires are biased and threaten to walk out on a tour then when they get the refferals they complain its biased against them. To top it all off they then refuse to implement the referral system against Sri Lanka and when Sri Lanka cop some bad decisions India claims its all part of the game.

Complaining through proper channels after play is one thing, armtwisting the on field umpire with invectives and threats another. It is not BCCI who took decision not to implement UDRS but ICC in the SL series.

 

[straw man]

Why so much publicity for a wrong/ contentious decision from the third umpire (which by the way was due to the third umpire's application of the rules, not the technology that is inevitably blamed). Meanwhile it seems to be passing everyones notice that the referral system has worked well numerous times since it was brought it - eg. Koertzen giving McCullum out lbw yesterday off a huge inside edge. Simple referral, overturned and on with the game.

It seems there are whole truckloads of officials, ex-players and reporters waiting for an opportunity to jump all over this system and talk it down at every opportunity. I hope Dave Richardson and the others tasked with implementing this have the will and the knowhow to keep pushing it.

 

[slugger]

maybe cause past players know they got away with dodgy decisions etc. and they know the system will expose their own short comings and maybe some of the averages might not all be truely reflective of the ability and skill, especailly those over zealous bowling appreallers.

 

[zaremba]

Why so much publicity for a wrong/ contentious decision from the third umpire (which by the way was due to the third umpire's application of the rules, not the technology that is inevitably blamed). Meanwhile it seems to be passing everyones notice that the referral system has worked well numerous times since it was brought it - eg. Koertzen giving McCullum out lbw yesterday off a huge inside edge. Simple referral, overturned and on with the game.

It seems there are whole truckloads of officials, ex-players and reporters waiting for an opportunity to jump all over this system and talk it down at every opportunity. I hope Dave Richardson and the others tasked with implementing this have the will and the knowhow to keep pushing it.

AWTA 100%. The errors will be magnified, the correct decisions all but ignored.

Fortunately the ICC, and Dave Richardson in particular, seem very keen.

The umpires today have had a good morning. Two close "not out" decisions; both were correct; and the decisions by the 3rd umpires were also correct. The whingeing from the fielding team has been minimised, and the on-field umpires' position has been strengthened.

 

[Streetwise]

Complaining through proper channels after play is one thing, armtwisting the on field umpire with invectives and threats another. It is not BCCI who took decision not to implement UDRS but ICC in the SL series.

It was the BCCI who didnt want to use the refferal system in the current series against Sri Lanka.

I agree that the BCCI should complain through the right channels instead of threating to walk out on tours unless they get what they want but you cannot change their victim mentality.

 

[Burgey]

Should add i'm not necessairily endorsing Benson's action, but umpires feeling undermined or humiliated is a fairly predictable issue, and performance suffering as their confidence is affected is equally predictable. There's already issues in attracting and retaining umpires.

All this for a system where howlers can still occur.

This generation of umpires may feel undermined, but you'd hope that those who come on the scene after it's implementation will just see the referral system as something that's part of the game.

 

[Uppercut]

This generation of umpires may feel undermined, but you'd hope that those who come on the scene after it's implementation will just see the referral system as something that's part of the game.

Why would they feel undermined exactly? Can someone explain this to me?

I don't actually give a damn if they do, but I never really understood the "poor umpires might be sad" line.

 

[Burgey]

Why would they feel undermined exactly? Can someone explain this to me?

I don't actually give a damn if they do, but I never really understood the "poor umpires might be sad" line.

Well I don't know why they'd feel it mate, as I can't know what's in someone else's mind absent them telling me [/wearinglegalhat].

But generally, if all you've know is one system, you'd be more likely to accept it. I mean, there was a whole generation of young voters here who knew nothing other than the unspeakable, unflushable Howard as PM. It's horrible, yet true.

 

[Athlai]

Rudi is a fan apparently.

 

[Uppercut]

Well I don't know why they'd feel it mate, as I can't know what's in someone else's mind absent them telling me [/wearinglegalhat].

But generally, if all you've know is one system, you'd be more likely to accept it. I mean, there was a whole generation of young voters here who knew nothing other than the unspeakable, unflushable Howard as PM. It's horrible, yet true.

I know you don't necessarily agree with that line of argument but you're not making a very good devil's advocate .

I don't think the idea that lots of umpires are old men who don't like change is what people who use the "undermining umpires" line mean...

 

[Burgey]

I know you don't necessarily agree with that line of argument but you're not making a very good devil's advocate .

I don't think the idea that lots of umpires are old men who don't like change is what people who use the "undermining umpires" line mean...

I don't really think they should feel undermined either, any more than they felt undermined when the referral for run outs was brought in. But there seems to be some suggestion they are being undermined.
I don't see how they're undermined any more by a reversal than they are by the entire cricket-watching world seeing they've ballsed something up but there's nothing been done about it.