**Official**VB Series 2005 Australia,Pakistan,West Indies.

[Slow Love™]

To get about 30 decisions wrong as is the case in the VB Series in the Pakistan v Aussie games alone is a shocking number. I totally agree with Bob Woolmer that the standard of umpiring in this recent series was absolutely diabolical.

Even though I agree that the standard of umpiring was fairly poor, I wouldn't wave that 30/29 figure around that Woolmer's produced as if it's some kind of proof or anything, particularly as we don't know what was counted, and haven't seen the breakdown of the calls.

From what I can tell, Woolmer's comment seems to be that, of 34 "contentious" decisions, 29 went in Australia's favor and 5 went Pakistan's way. I'm not totally sure that translates directly to "30 wrong decisions".

 

[Fiery]

Even though I agree that the standard of umpiring was fairly poor, I wouldn't wave that 30/29 figure around that Woolmer's produced as if it's some kind of proof or anything, particularly as we don't know what was counted, and haven't seen the breakdown of the calls.

From what I can tell, Woolmer's comment seems to be that, of 34 "contentious" decisions, 29 went in Australia's favor and 5 went Pakistan's way. I'm not totally sure that translates directly to "30 wrong decisions".

True, but having that many contentious decisions is not good umpiring and is a pretty good argument for bringing the 3rd umpire into play more. At least the 3rd umpire would have reduced the number of contentious decisions to a just a small number which, even on replay, could have gone either way.

 

[tooextracool]

And how many decisions does an umpire make in a game?

Consider that there's 300 balls from each end in an ODI...

no because IMO decisions such as calling wides, no balls etc dont count as decisions. how many lbw and caught behind shouts would you have in 50 overs?

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

no because IMO decisions such as calling wides, no balls etc dont count as decisions. how many lbw and caught behind shouts would you have in 50 overs?

See, there's this thing called concentration. Umpires have to keep it. They don't just fast forward to the relevant deliveries.

 

[tooextracool]

yes i know, but it really isnt that hard to get decisions such as wides and no balls right. it is however extremely difficult to judge an lbw or a caught behind.

 

[chaminda_00]

I don't think the umpiring was as bad as Woolmer and others have said it was, it is just the fact that other teams don't make the most of decision that go their way, like the Australia. So any bad decision that go aganist Pakistan or other get put over top.

In say all this the umpiring standard in Test Cricket has improved allot across the board since neutral umpires were in place. The problem with having home umpires in ODIs is that most countires don't have more then two umpires of high standard e.g Elite Panel Standard. So maybe it is time to get rid of the home umpires system and neutral umpire system and just pick the best umpires avialable. For example for the VB Series u just pick the best six umpires avaiable, let say Bowden, Korsten, Tuefel, Harper, Lloyld and Sheppard, these umpires offiate thoughout the series

 

[Scallywag]

To get about 30 decisions wrong as is the case in the VB Series in the Pakistan v Aussie games alone is a shocking number. I totally agree with Bob Woolmer that the standard of umpiring in this recent series was absolutely diabolical.

Bob Woolmer said there were 29 bad decisions against Pak and 5 against Aus for the test and VB series, you have now said it was only the VB series.

Funny how these things get blown all out of proportion.

 

[Deja moo]

Its 29-6 for the entire tour. And thats still appaling.

 

[Deja moo]

See, there's this thing called concentration. Umpires have to keep it. They don't just fast forward to the relevant deliveries.

You cannot equate wide and no ball calls to calls made on wicket appeals.
It isnt as simple as describing one bad decision as 0.33% of a game. Decisions on wickets have a much greater impact on the game than wrong wide ball calls.

 

[Scallywag]

Its 29-6 for the entire tour. And thats still appaling.

Thats only Woolmers view.

If Buchanan come out and said it was 16 against Australia and 2 against Pak would it suddenly be poor umpiring against Australia.

I'm sure Woolmer didnt look for bad decisions against Australia but included some decisions that were good as "bad" simply because he didnt like them, we know how biased some people are when refering to their own team.

 

[chaminda_00]

Bob Woolmer said there were 29 bad decisions against Pak and 5 against Aus for the test and VB series, you have now said it was only the VB series.

Funny how these things get blown all out of proportion.

I don't think he ever used the words bad decision, all he said was out of 34 line ball decision 29 went to Australia and 5 went Pakistan. In theroy line ball decision should go 50/50 not 90/10 in the favour of the home team. I don't think his number were right but i wouldn't be surprised if it was 60/40 in favor of the Aussie. But i think home sides all around the world get decisions go 60/40 in favour of them, it seems to be part of the home ground advantage, it happens in all sports

 

[Deja moo]

Thats only Woolmers view.

If Buchanan come out and said it was 16 against Australia and 2 against Pak would it suddenly be poor umpiring against Australia.

I'm sure Woolmer didnt look for bad decisions against Australia but included some decisions that were good as "bad" simply because he didnt like them, we know how biased some people are when refering to their own team.

I'm sure Woolmer knows more about this than you do.

 

[chaminda_00]

Thats only Woolmers view.

If Buchanan come out and said it was 16 against Australia and 2 against Pak would it suddenly be poor umpiring against Australia.

I'm sure Woolmer didnt look for bad decisions against Australia but included some decisions that were good as "bad" simply because he didnt like them, we know how biased some people are when refering to their own team.

I seen the Australian complain about the umpiring when they lost that odd test. I'm sure if the Australian loss a test in england they will blame the umpires, like they done in the past in India

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

I seen the Australian complain about the umpiring when they lost that odd test. I'm sure if the Australian loss a test in england they will blame the umpires, like they done in the past in India

No doubt some Australians would, and they would be just as bad as everyone else who pointlessly harps on about umpiring because their team is losing.

 

[Deja moo]

No doubt some Australians would, and they would be just as bad as everyone else who pointlessly harps on about umpiring because their team is losing.

I would have expected Scallywag to come up with this, but not from you.


Iam an Indian and feel no special love for Pakistan, but the damn issue is so glaring that it cannot be ignored. Iam not 'harping' on it because it involves Australia ( the world does not revolve around Australia.) Why can people not accept the fact that someone might be criticising the standard of umpiring for the sake of fairer decisions, and not just because some team happens to be losing to Australia?

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

I would have expected Scallywag to come up with this, but not from you.


Iam an Indian and feel no special love for Pakistan, but the damn issue is so glaring that it cannot be ignored. Iam not 'harping' on it because it involves Australia ( the world does not revolve around Australia.) Why can people not accept the fact that someone might be criticising the standard of umpiring for the sake of fairer decisions, and not just because some team happens to be losing to Australia?

Note the post I was quoting. He was saying that Australians would complain about umpiring if Australia were to lose in the Ashes. Undoubtedly some would.

The problem I have is not with people discussing poor umpiring decisions, but when people who support the side who is losing in effect blame the umpires for the result, even going as far (as some have in this thread) as occusing the umpires of cheating or being biased towards the opposition. There was a particularly large amount of this in the India v Australia series last year.

Personally, I support the human judgement and independance of the umpires, and feel that poor umpiring decisions even themselves out in the end. I find it irritiating when someone accuses the umpires of cheating basically because their team is losing and want they something other than being outplayed to blame it on. I'm not talking about people who simply believe the umpiring was below average and wish to see it improve.

 

[Deja moo]

Note the post I was quoting. He was saying that Australians would complain about umpiring if Australia were to lose in the Ashes. Undoubtedly some would.

The problem I have is not with people discussing poor umpiring decisions, but when people who support the side who is losing in effect blame the umpires for the result, even going as far (as some have in this thread) as occusing the umpires of cheating or being biased towards the opposition. There was a particularly large amount of this in the India v Australia series last year.

Personally, I support the human judgement and independance of the umpires, and feel that poor umpiring decisions even themselves out in the end. I find it irritiating when someone accuses the umpires of cheating basically because their team is losing and want they something other than being outplayed to blame it on. I'm not talking about people who simply believe the umpiring was below average and wish to see it improve.

I think Woolmer did make it clear that he was not accuing the umpires of being biased. But he did say that he felt that the umpires subconsciously were under pressure to award close decisions to the home team due to crowd pressure and appealing etc. There surely has to be some reason for such a lopsided interpretation of close calls by the umpires ! It might be Australia this time, India next time, Pakistan the next and so on. The things-even-out-over-a-period-of-time is a poor argument. Does that mean that its all fine if Australia get 29-6 close calls in their favour this time, followed by 29-6 close calls going the way of their opponents the next series ? How is that cricket?

What poor umpiring results in is that the supporters of the affected team feel robbed and the supporters of the victorious team are angered because the legitimacy of their teams success is shaken somewhat. It is simply a no win situation for both sides, and I cannot understand why people would still want to stand in the way of technology being implemented. I mean, some do not trust Hawkeye, fine. What about that experiment carried out in the 2002 CT wherein close lbws were referred to the third umpire? Whats 20 extra seconds if it ensures better decisions ?

 

[Fiery]

I cannot understand why people would still want to stand in the way of technology being implemented.

Whats 20 extra seconds if it ensures better decisions ?

Well said. I'm sick of umpires taking a guess after being influenced by the appeal and the crowd only to be proven they were wrong 20 seconds later by a replay even when the decision goes in favour of the side I'm supporting. When it favours an Australian it's twice as frustrating and makes me want to throw a stubbie at the TV.

 

[SJS]

Some of the umpires in the world are not great. Some others are well past their use by date. Others are doing a great job. Yes they are exposed more today than before due to all the technology available to the broadcasters and through them to the viewers.

So.

Should they be spared for making mistakes because they are human, because the poor guys dont have excess to hindsight or most of the technology that you and I have??

Should teams complain against bad umpiring ONLY when they are winning ?

Should any complaints , howsoever justified, be considered moaning and whining and a a case of sour grapes and worse (unsportsmanlike conduct) because they were made by a side which lost ??

When one team complains about the umpiring in a match, should the other team or its officials comment on this ??

Should all bad umpiring be considered error of judgement and should umpires be considered impervious to other pressures (not bias mind you) of crowds, players, excessive appealing etc.??

The answer to all of the above has to be a resounding NO irrespective of which team/country you support, whether your team is winning or losing and whether your team is getting the better or worse of poor umpiring.

Do supporters of teams behave in this eminently rational manner, on this board and elsewhere ?

NO !!!

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

Whats 20 extra seconds if it ensures better decisions ?

Quite simply, I favour the human element of umpiring over using technology. Firstly, technology at this point is still flawed. Umpires judgement can be innaccurate, but personally I trust an impartial umpire a matter of metres from the action more than technology which may be completely off, camera angles which can lie etc.

There are some elements of the game where technology could be implemented and solve more problems than it would create. Examples are for the calling of no-balls (like in tennis), run outs and stumpings etc.Using technology for things such as determining whether or not the ball hit the edge of the bat, whether or not the ball carried to a fielder for a catch or whether or not the ball would have gone on to hit the stumps in an lbw appeal is more problematic than helpful and should be avoided.

In all the times you have seen catches referred to the third umpire, how many times has a still camera shot been able to determine conclusively whether or not a catch was taken? How much do you trust HawkEye to determine the trajectory of a ball when the pitch is seaming or turning a great deal and it hit the pads on the half-volley? How many times can you tell just from looking at video whether or not there was a thin edge on a ball through to the keeper? Sorry, but using technology will not solve any of these problems, and we should instead put our support behind the umpires and offer them the assistance they need to make the best judgement they can.