PDA

View Full Version : Get rid of square leg umpire?


fab
October 15, 2003, 06:05 PM
What do you guys think?

"Do I have any antidotes? Yes, use some common-sense. First, go back to the traditional two umpires in Tests and ODIs. But we should have one umpire at the bowler's end, and the second in the pavilion watching the TV screen. The square-leg umpire should be removed altogether.

Almost unnoticed, these days the responsibilities of the square-leg umpire are all executed by the TV umpire - so why not eliminate this position? "

SOURCE (http://www-aus.cricket.org/link_to_database/ARCHIVE/CRICKET_NEWS/2003/OCT/359342_CI_15OCT2003.html)

Carte Blanche
October 15, 2003, 09:37 PM
The thought of getting rid of square leg umpire is ridiculous. It not only takes a human element out of the game, but also overlooks the point of having two umpires for one game. If you get rid of one umpire, it means you will be left with only one umpire to officiate the game. Referral of every run out decision to 3rd umpire is time consuming, and very disruptive. Square leg umpire also gives bouncer notice and calls no ball on beamers. One umpire will barely have the energy to officiate during the whole match. And I don't like the idea of having two umpires for two sessions of a ODI match either. Square leg umpire can also assist the main end umpire in solving various issues. I believe Darrel Hair once called Murali for chucking even though he wasn't at the bowling end. Although it's not the best of examples, cricket would have been shy of a controversy should there had been no square leg umpire in the first place. But that's not the point. Who calls for the 3rd umpire most of the time? It's the leg umpire who does that. If you don't have him officiating there, every single run-out, stumping incident would have to be referred upstairs, which is ridiculous.

Carte Blanche
October 15, 2003, 10:16 PM
I read Rashid Latif's article all over again. Although I am trying not to be influenced by the Kapali catch debacle, but he sounds no better than a whining baby. Cricket is a game of character, and you ought to face the fact that decisions are part of the game. No sport is free of controversy, you still have the football controversies over a bad red-card decision, you get high-stick controversies in hockey, so on and so forth. Technology can never replace the referees/umpires (whatever position they might have) for the sake of abfab accuracy. We do need the human touch in the sport.