Lv 5
MeL asked in SportsCricket · 1 decade ago

The Umpire Referral System?

Clause 3.8 of the Umpire Review System -

"If the TV umpire is unable to answer with certainty he shall report that replays are inconclusive. He should not convey likelihood or probability." The decision made by the on-field umpire is then upheld.

Example of this:

A futile appeal for caught behind, umpire gives it out. McCullum immediately appealed the decision under the referral system, and television umpire Mark Benson had no way of confirming an edge so the on-field decision was upheld.

MAJOR fault in my opinion.

Do you agree with this?

Also there's a bit of talk that the referral system 'undermines the authority of on-field officials'.

Do you agree with this?

In McCullum's case clearly you could tell that he knew he didn't get bat on ball, do you agree that as a player he was somewhat undermined?

The Umpire Referral System is supposed to prevent bad decisions from happening. I feel the ICC have made the system to prevent bad decisions and done it in such a way that it also prevents players from undermining on-field umpires. It doesn't seem to work as shown in McCullum's case.

OVERALL QUESTION: Should the System be scratched and the 'bad decisions eventually even themselves out over time for sides as well as players' motive be taken?

10 Answers

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago
    Best Answer

    I agree with the referral system,just so the correct decisions are being made.

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    The Umpire Referral System is a good system, but it is not foolproof. I am all for using technology where available; cricket is now big business, and important decisions can make a huge difference to a player's career, or the result of a match. It would be foolhardy to shun the use of technology, and would prevent the sport from moving forward.

    But that is not to say that technology has all the answers. Sometimes you just cannot tell, no matter how good the technology is, what has actually happended.

    An example I will use is Geoff Hurst's third goal in the 1966 World Cup Final (Football/soccer). He struck a shot that hit the underside of the crossbar, bounced down, and was then cleared away. The linesman flagged to say it was a goal, but TV replays could not determine whether it was a goal or not, as the view was obsured by th goal post. Forty years later, technology has improved drastically, and has been employed to decide once and for all whether it did actually cross the line. Results have proved inconclusive.

    And so is the case in cricket. A faint edge here or there, a sound that could be pad or bat, sometimes you just can't tell. But also, it picks up the sights and sounds if a batsman slightly brushes the ball with his bat if it passes. Now, should that be given out, if the ball doesn't deviate due to the barest hairsbreadth of contact that does not cause the ball to deviate in the slightest from its original cause?

    So I am both for and against the system. I feel it should only be used if absoloutely necessary, and it should be the umpires who make the decision to refer, not the players. If the TV umpire cannot decide, then it should be left to the on field umpires to make the decisions.

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    Presently, this referral system is a complete disaster. How dumb does someone have to be to make a wrong call even WITH the help of computer replays, etc?

    Right now, a referral system is really needed. The recent t20 match between India and Sri Lanka had about 5 wrong calls, and that was shameful.

    The problem is, the system's rules isn't 'tight' enough. It allows too much error. The third umpire should be 100% sure about if it is OUT or NOT OUT. You can't be hanging on the fence even with the help of computers. I know it is difficult, but they have to be able to use SNICKO, or it called...the heat sensor thingy (that indicates where the ball first hit).

    When McCullum got out, the third umpire didn't use the help of that... Heat sensor thingy. BUT, after he left the field, they did use it, and found that he wasn't out. But it was too late.

  • вєи
    Lv 7
    1 decade ago

    Umpire referral system is a good way to eliminate wrong decisions and thus controversy.

    But it should be improved by allowing the use of 'hotspot', which will help in confirming where the ball has made contact.

  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • 1 decade ago

    This referral system has flaws and it enters in to the area of power which is otherwise accepted as power of on field umpires. Umpires decisions as it goes 99.9% players accept as this game still remains as gentlemen game.there are few faulty decisions in the history of cricket which has turned topsy turfy . but can't do any thing now. as a qualified umpire I believe field umpires are left as it is and no one should encroach their area of power.

  • 1 decade ago

    this is good for cricket for me.. as like side bottom take the referral in 1st test match.. that was also out.. player just take chances.. or waste time.. but try to change obvious decision.. ICC should make some rule for the players that players dont do childish things and show some sports man spirite

    Source(s): kashikooler979.brain
  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    it's great. now most of the people cann't shout that a team cheated to win.

    but the third umpire has to get it right. eg: darell harper messed up big time in west indies. LOL.

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    Right now, a referral system is really needed~

  • 1 decade ago

    unfortunately a consistency is missing as to the batter always gets the benefit of doubt

  • 1 decade ago

    Referral System must be there..

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.