PDA

View Full Version : ICC REview System: Impact to Bangladesh


Dhakablues
November 18, 2009, 04:57 PM
So, finally NZ board is taking the tab and so is Australia for the ICC Review. Understandably, India didnt want to spend 'money' on review system ( they are more interested in making money than spending it for good cause. as we know). Finally, Technology is being used in Cricket. I remember when the 3rd umpire thing was being rolled out, many cricket greats, including my favorite King Khan, were opposed to it saying that umpires are the final person to make the call...

This changes many things. We wouldnt have the Multan situation, we wouldve had many LBW decisions not given to us come our way because the umpires bias towards the weak. I think Bangladesh board should also insists NZ board to continue the review system for the upcoming NZ-BD tests. I mean, how much money are we talking about? It cant be that expensive for the boards to reject technology when a game's fate is determined by some decisions by the 'Elite' Umpires ( consisting of our beleoved Ahoka et al)
Link: http://www.cricinfo.com/nzvpak2009/content/current/story/435047.html

al Furqaan
November 19, 2009, 12:44 AM
good on NZ and AUS. is BCCI headed by a gujurati?

at any rate, BCB should also chip in. we stand to benefit the most, and money is made to be spent, wisely of course.

Baundule
November 19, 2009, 04:32 AM
Technology should be used as much as possible to get the decisions right. Teams that are used to get benefit from biased umpiring will oppose it, as simple as that. Of course, the review system itself is as good as the rules that constrain it.

yaseer
November 19, 2009, 05:03 AM
I am not sure whether we can be that much benefited with review system as we are thinking.

From some previous cases, we have seen that even after review system, 50-50 decisions are still questionable. Its upto the 3rd umpire to decide such as "the ball would miss the leg-stump", "the ball would go over the stupms." And questionable decisions we have seen from this scenarios and it differs from person to person. So, again it comes to the same question, "will 3rd umpire be bias against weak teams to be in safe?"

Baundule
November 19, 2009, 05:37 AM
I am not sure whether we can be that much benefited with review system as we are thinking.

From some previous cases, we have seen that even after review system, 50-50 decisions are still questionable. Its upto the 3rd umpire to decide such as "the ball would miss the leg-stump", "the ball would go over the stupms." And questionable decisions we have seen from this scenarios and it differs from person to person. So, again it comes to the same question, "will 3rd umpire be bias against weak teams to be in safe?"
spot on! That was the case when it was introduced in the WI-* series. It should be left to the hawk-eye to decide, if the ball was hitting the stump or not. Someone may question the correctness of the Hawk-eye technology; but it at least makes things equal. The third umpire does not need to anticipate anything, no one gets the benefit of doubt, when the doubt can be eliminated. Edge, bat first or pad first etc. can be left to snicko and hotspot as much as possible. This will also make the decisions faster, which again answers the questions of some critics that think technology will slow down a match.

AsifTheManRahman
November 19, 2009, 10:47 AM
What do we need human umpires for?

al Furqaan
November 20, 2009, 10:02 AM
I am not sure whether we can be that much benefited with review system as we are thinking.

From some previous cases, we have seen that even after review system, 50-50 decisions are still questionable. Its upto the 3rd umpire to decide such as "the ball would miss the leg-stump", "the ball would go over the stupms." And questionable decisions we have seen from this scenarios and it differs from person to person. So, again it comes to the same question, "will 3rd umpire be bias against weak teams to be in safe?"

if it was merely about 50-50 decisions human umpires would suffice. heck, the players themselves could officiate the game on an "honor system".

50-50 decisions are not problem, as they even out over the course of a match. at any rate, when something is that close, you really can't argue with a decision one way or the other.

the issue is the blatantly wrong calls. with umpires like bucknor and ashoka, and peter parker, who only seem to officiate our matches, we get screwed quite often. with the blatant calls, a third umpire is much more likely to make a correct call than the monstrosities of your bucknor-ashoka-parker axis of stupidity can provide.

i'd rather have a good call go against us, then benefit from a BS umpiring decision - which just ruins the game.

Tigers_eye
November 20, 2009, 10:10 AM
if it was merely about 50-50 decisions human umpires would suffice. heck, the players themselves could officiate the game on an "honor system".

50-50 decisions are not problem, as they even out over the course of a match. at any rate, when something is that close, you really can't argue with a decision one way or the other.

the issue is the blatantly wrong calls. with umpires like bucknor and ashoka, and peter parker, who only seem to officiate our matches, we get screwed quite often. with the blatant calls, a third umpire is much more likely to make a correct call than the monstrosities of your bucknor-ashoka-parker axis of stupidity can provide.

i'd rather have a good call go against us, then benefit from a BS umpiring decision - which just ruins the game.
Game, set, and match. After this post of the month: Any comments from those who don't like or want review system?

al Furqaan
November 23, 2009, 05:23 PM
i hope the BCB implements the UDRS, despite its costs. perhaps the visiting teams could also split the cost with us, or agree to use it whenever we tour them. if the NZ board can afford it, i'm sure BCB can as well as we probably have more money than they do.

my prediction is this: don't know about England or SA, but given the general bitchiness of the BCCI and their uber sore-losership, i guarantee you BCCI will jump aboard the review system within 1 year. the UDRS is bound to make the game better, even though it may introduce its own flaws and ambiguities, but overall it will make a HUGE difference, and given that Indians have been victimized in the past, i'm sure they'll eventually spring for it. especially if their fanbase begins to demand it.

BCB should definitley spring for this, and use it against our test series against India. heck, we don't play that many tests anyways. might as well ensure quality when we certainly won't get any quantity.

BCB, your path is clear...do the right thing!