its time to end the review system of umpiring

[Daemon]

I don't, I want every decision to go the way of my team.

Nicholl’s luck to reach 10 leaf clover levels

 

[shortpitched713]

Overall there seems to be 3 main issues at stake.
1. We all want the best result in terms of the correct decision made on the field.
2. Nobody wants to see teams use their challenges and be left high and dry(even if poor challenges were made earlier in the innings)
3. The time factor seems an issue here, we don't want to watch about an hour of reviews/challengers every day of test cricket.
If there was to be something along the lines of ''umpires challenge'', I'm pretty confident it would aid all 3 instances.

Number 2 is a bit tough, because a) it directly conflicts with number 3, and b) even if you give a fielding team 15 unsuccessful challenges an innings, some nonce captain will find a way to use them up before the end of the innings, feeling fully justified and hard done at the end of it. There has to be a happy median for this, because pursuing number 2 as an ideal in an absolute manner is actually impossible.

Also, isn't there already an umpire's challenge?

 

[TheJediBrah]

Number 2 is a bit tough, because a) it directly conflicts with number 3, and b) even if you give a fielding team 15 unsuccessful challenges an innings, some nonce captain will find a way to use them up before the end of the innings, feeling fully justified and hard done at the end of it. There has to be a happy median for this, because pursuing number 2 as an ideal in an absolute manner is actually impossible.

Also, isn't there already an umpire's challenge?

Yes, increasing the number of challenges will not reduce the risk of them getting used up. They will just be used way more liberally.

 

[Victor Ian]

It’s simple to fix. Umpires umpire and players ask for a review. As many as they like.

If a batsman is given out and asks for a review, and he’s incorrect, he (and the team) are penalised an an amount of runs. Let’s say 12.

If a bowler disagrees with an umpire’s call, and asks for a review, and is incorrect, the next two balls become free hits for the batsman on strike.

I don’t necessarily like this because runs really should only come in conventional ways, but I think it’d make teams think hard about reviewing half assed things. There needs to be some sort of penalty for reviewing rubbish just because you can.

How about instead of awarding runs, you award tracking error. If batsman call a failed review, the virtual wicket gets bigger. The reverse for bowlers.

 

[ashley bach]

Number 2 is a bit tough, because a) it directly conflicts with number 3, and b) even if you give a fielding team 15 unsuccessful challenges an innings, some nonce captain will find a way to use them up before the end of the innings, feeling fully justified and hard done at the end of it. There has to be a happy median for this, because pursuing number 2 as an ideal in an absolute manner is actually impossible.

Also, isn't there already an umpire's challenge?

Think umpires can only challenge for something technical like if a catch has carried or not.
For a caught behind or LBW they just got to make a decision, sometimes very unsure themselves no doubt.

 

[ashley bach]

Yes, increasing the number of challenges will not reduce the risk of them getting used up. They will just be used way more liberally.

There's no mention of increasing challenges, their quota stays the same.
If the umpire decides not to challenge you'd think the players would be less inclined to waste one.

 

[TheJediBrah]

There's no mention of increasing challenges, their quota stays the same.

I was just agreeing with another post that mentioned it

 

[cnerd123]

If you allow umpires to use the tech at their discretion then they can also pick which tools they want to use at a certain moment. Like perhaps it's obvious there is no bat involved in an LBW appeal and they just want to check Hawkeye. Then you don't need to spend time checking snicko. It's not going to the long cumbersome process every time.

 

[TheJediBrah]

That would be great in a fantasy land where umpires never simply got things wrong.

It's a fallacy to assume that every wrong decision an umpire makes is one that they are not confident about and would have reviewed if they had the chance.

 

[honestbharani]

I don't, I want every decision to go the way of my team.

If only @cnerd123 were to say that

 

[Daemon]

If you allow umpires to use the tech at their discretion then they can also pick which tools they want to use at a certain moment. Like perhaps it's obvious there is no bat involved in an LBW appeal and they just want to check Hawkeye. Then you don't need to spend time checking snicko. It's not going to the long cumbersome process every time.

Umpires generally have very low IQ so this won't work