PDA

View Full Version : Bucknor accuses TV Production Companies of doctored images in International Matches


Miraz
May 7, 2006, 07:23 AM
One key paragraph from Bucknor's interview with Trinidad and Tobago Express

Bucknor, who has stood in a world record 111 Tests and four World Cup finals, as well as officiated 139 one-day internationals, noted he was speaking from personal experience. "It has happened; I've been in a game when it has happened," he said. "Sometimes nothing is shown because the batsman was a key batsman and getting out at that stage would have made life very difficult for that team. It all depends on who is operating the technology. I've been told that this ball is the one with which the batsman got out, but the one that is being shown is not the same one he got out with. It has been known to happen. When these things are happening, it makes life extremely difficult for the umpires. Who do you trust from there on you don't know."

Full article from ICC website (http://www.icc-cricket.com/icc-news/content/story/246387.html)

This is a real danger and after the players have got the right to appeal, TV compaines can doctor images to keep players on the field or off the field depending on their choice.

prasad
May 7, 2006, 07:33 AM
poor teams (in terms of sports tele companies) like bd,wi will suffer.

Miraz
May 7, 2006, 07:38 AM
poor teams (in terms of sports tele companies) like bd,wi will suffer.

India and England will dominate. This is crap and crazy. Any company found guilty of doing this (in past or if does the same in future) should be banned for life.

prasad
May 7, 2006, 08:33 AM
as of now only bd,sl,zim and wi home series r not produced by the home companies.sl =tensports,bd=espnstar,wi = sky broadcasting(uk). not sure abt zim.this is a serious matter though.hawkeye manipulation...:( :(

bharat
May 7, 2006, 04:35 PM
Personally I dont believe Bucknor's alligations ..I think they are too far fetched.I dont think that the broadcaster would have the time to tamper the "evidence" in such a short span of time (we are talking abt seconds in here).Also , I dont see a Broadcasting company risking there repute for a Team (even if it is there home country ..) .They are too much into money to even think abt a country leave alone a team (or a "star" player).

I remember Bucknor being a very "good" umpire in his initail stage of his carrier , but I am afraid he has been close to crap (sorry for the this word ..but thats how I felt at some of his decisions) in the last 2-3 years .

cheers
bharat

akabir77
May 7, 2006, 06:58 PM
I think bucnor is afraid of technology same way some people r afraid to use the dishwasher.. Also i think there should be limit for the challenge just like in NFL. if the challenge stands you still have three but it doesn't stand then there should be an punishment along with the reduced challenge for that team. In this way challenging team will think twice before challenging. Punishment could be deduct of few runs or some thing.. it could be called extra subtraction or something...

Frost
May 8, 2006, 12:14 AM
I don't believe what Bucknor just alleged. Looks like he is getting old and becoming a technophobe. Besides he is making too many mistakes these days. So introduction of tech will take his job and he is afraid of that.

DJ Sahastra
May 9, 2006, 11:19 AM
We have a saying in Hindi "Ulta Chor Kotwaal Ko Daate".

Translation "The thief is actually shouting at the cop".

Steve Bucknor has been a rank bad umpire for past several years. His reflexes are slow, eyesight weak and judgement even more pathetic. Many a times one wonders if he is just competent or favours the team that can benefir him more.

What TV crew shows is usually consistent with what we see live. His allegations are more of an publicity stunt.

Sauron
May 9, 2006, 11:29 AM
Bucknor sounds like an "old guy" ... doesn't understand technology and also probably in denial about however many wrong decisions he perpetuated.

In my book, Bucknor loses all credibility after such a ridiculous statement.

Tigers_eye
May 9, 2006, 11:47 AM
I think this is sour grapes. if a ball would be doctored in replay we the viewers wouldn't realise it? If the 3rd umpire's screen is doctored wouldn't he realise it? It shows from different angles and the batsmen may not try to play the similar shot. As bharat has already mentioned the time is matter of few seconds. The 3rd umpire has to give the decision ASAP.

And say his monitor had been doctored to aid the wrong decision, wouldn't he be subjected to severe scrutiny after and during the match by the commentators, fans, team management?

Bucknor's comment don't make sense at all.

Miraz
May 9, 2006, 12:19 PM
I am confused after Harsha's admittance. Quotes from Cricinfo

'"The more technology ICC uses, the more they hand over responsibility to the television producer. The position of the mat is the producer's responsibility and that can definitely be tampered with,"

One broadcaster, speaking on the condition of anonymity, concurred with Bhogle and even added that, "there have been suspicions in the past that producers, especially from certain countries, have been a touch too patriotic, and have withheld replays that went against home teams."

Sauron
May 9, 2006, 02:33 PM
I am confused after Harsha's admittance. Quotes from Cricinfo

'"The more technology ICC uses, the more they hand over responsibility to the television producer. The position of the mat is the producer's responsibility and that can definitely be tampered with,"

One broadcaster, speaking on the condition of anonymity, concurred with Bhogle and even added that, "there have been suspicions in the past that producers, especially from certain countries, have been a touch too patriotic, and have withheld replays that went against home teams."

What Bucknor suggested (showing a different delivery from the one that caused the out) is too much of a stretch.

But this seems more like lying by omission. I can probably believe that an unscrupulous producer might suppress a replay from a particular angle that goes against his interest. It means that there has to be a "fourth umpire" sitting with the producer and making sure that all relevant camera angles are supplied to the third umpire.

Frost
May 11, 2006, 07:48 AM
Let's what TV companies have to say about Bucknor's comment:

http://content-usa.cricinfo.com/ci/content/current/story/246794.html

Miraz
May 11, 2006, 01:37 PM
ICC seems to be really concerned with Bucknor's allegation and taking him to the wire. Quotes from Cricinfo

Dave Richardson, the ICC's general manager - cricket, was less than complimentary about Bucknor in an interview with the BBC. "Umpires are always defensive about their own decisions. I often point to him as a very good example of why we need to give technology a go.
"He's done particularly well this year. After not a great year last year, he's averaging around 96% of his decisions being correct, [B]and yet he's made one or two decisions which have come in for terrible criticism from the media and from fans writing in to us."