OverratedSanity
Request Your Custom Title Now!
But I don't see how reversing an on field decision because there wasn't any evidence of it being the right one is somehow diminishing the dignity of the umpire.It doesn't matter whether you cbf about it. No one cares about that. The game wants to establish the primacy of the on field umpire for the very good reason someone has to be respected for the conduct of the game. A vital goal for any organisation whether you recognise it or not. The 3rd umpire had no evidence to say the on field ump was wrong. Benefit of the doubt doesn't always have to go to the batsman and in this case it runs a poor second to upholding the dignity of the on field umpire.
And on the bolded part, that's just wrong. A lack of evidence of the batsman having edged it pretty much means he's not out. The lack of evidence is the evidence. It's been the norm that benefit of doubt should go to the batsman for ages, rightly so. This stupid system throws that in the bin to "uphold the dignity" of the umpire. What does that even mean? It's just a meaningless phrase.