stefan
International Coach
The review system is good, Benson is just acting like a little girl.
Umpire Benson retires with immediate effect - Row over the Review System
- Thread starter Cricketman
- Start date
Prithvi
10 years at Planetcricket
I don't agree as its disgrace if it concludes that onfield umpire is wrong.
P
pcfan123
Guest
Anyone who saw day 5 of NZ PAK (B McCullum) will agree that the umpire review system works and is here to stay. Even Murali was upset it was not being used in the IND SL series.
Prithvi
10 years at Planetcricket
A person, who is standing and taking double the efforts, what players are taking, and giving decisions should not be questioned.
If you say its better using review system, why do you need on field umpires then??
Just let them sit in AC room upstairs and give 100 % decisions by having replays, Hawk Eyes, Snicko's etc etc...
Sri Lankans won test series against India last year only because of that so called "Review System".
They will be questioned with or without a review system. The players questioned umpires long before the review system and some have even gone public with it. Also the ICC umpire panel always question if the umpire has made the right call and based on that they decided their elite panel.
Because the review system is based on what the onfield umpire calls. If he has given it not out then there has to be enough evidence to overturn the decision. No onifled umpire means no review system...
WORLD CHAMPIONS
PC Battrick Cup Champion S17
Who will call no ball and wides then ?? As far i know still no technology has been invented through which these called be made autometcially.
Lanka did won that series atleast they knew how to use the review system, unlike team india were busy making a mockery of themselves. Calling for blunt reviews. Lanka got everytime their reviews correctly, where India didn't had any chance with the reviews.
Cricketman
ICC Chairman
- Joined
- Jul 27, 2005
- Location
- USA
You could use machines like they do in tennis for foot faults. That could easily be implemented for no balls and perhaps even for wides.
And as for your second point I distinctly remember a case when Jayawardene and his men discussed the referral for a good 45seconds to a minute before actually calling it. Things like that really irked me. You can't take so long.
StinkyBoHoon
National Board President
- Joined
- Mar 5, 2009
- Location
- Glasgow, Scotland
it's meant to be used to remove the shocker. the bad decisions that teams whine about after the match. right now in australia it's being used like a lottery ticket.
Australia basically only used their two today to see if they could poach gayle cheaply. the windies also used theirs to see if they could keep their best batsmen in.
it's not meant for let offs, it's meant to stop awful decisions. I said when it was initiated that after the match captains should be forced to go to the match referee and explain every single unsuccesful referal and it should carry similar penalties to over-appealing if the explanations are consistently flimsy. I would fine gayle for the first match and ponting for this one if this was done.
Australia basically only used their two today to see if they could poach gayle cheaply. the windies also used theirs to see if they could keep their best batsmen in.
it's not meant for let offs, it's meant to stop awful decisions. I said when it was initiated that after the match captains should be forced to go to the match referee and explain every single unsuccesful referal and it should carry similar penalties to over-appealing if the explanations are consistently flimsy. I would fine gayle for the first match and ponting for this one if this was done.
Dare
Chairman of Selectors
But it doesn't help when the umpire says not out for a caught behind appeal, the fielding side refers it and its still given not out. Then almost the same exact thing happens later on in the innings and its given out.
Thats what takes peoples fate away from the referral system. Consistency with the calls is important. If one is not out the other one shouldn't be if the circumstances are almost the same.
I'm in favor of the system but it still needs some work.
Thats what takes peoples fate away from the referral system. Consistency with the calls is important. If one is not out the other one shouldn't be if the circumstances are almost the same.
I'm in favor of the system but it still needs some work.
Dare
Chairman of Selectors
Will every country be able to implement that technology? To get that many cameras to cover all the angles needed to give the umpire the best chance at making the correct decision.
I also don't see what the umpire saw to give Barath out in that occasion. I know it wasn't referred by the players but it doesn't put any trust into the 3rd umpire.
Last edited:
Well we are getting the side on ones from the NZ v Pakistan series,
Dare
Chairman of Selectors
But countries like WI and Bangladesh might not be able to get all that. Also it needs to be used in all the series, not just here and there. Needs to be made mandatory.
