The Third Umpire system has gone a long way to changing the face of cricket and ensuring more consistent umpiring decisions. This is a good thing, given the level of television coverage that highlights mistakes by the onfield umpires. But it is still not enough. It’s time we pushed our cricketing frontiers a little further westwards.
By Simon Lewis (2000)
It should be so simple. We have the technology. We have the cameras. And yet still we have umpiring controversies. We simply must get it right.
Caught-behind and leg-before wicket remain an untapped area of opportunity for the Third Umpire, which the current camera coverage can’t provide sufficiently revealing replay footage to adjudicate on accurately.
There is only one solution. And the only way is up.
A camera suspended over the pitch (an Aerial Umpire), erected temporarily for big matches which receive major television coverage, will provide a whole new range of views and angles which the Third Umpires will be able to access to provide a better quality of decision-making on a highly consistent level. This camera could be attached by cords to the grandstands, sightscreens, floodlight pylons or underneath a miniature hot air balloon. Technology will find a way.
In addition, the side view should be used by the Third Umpire to verify that the ball’s path does not indicate that the ball might pass over the top of the stumps for leg-before appeals. Alternatively, the square leg umpire could confirm this to his fellow umpire - a backup system that could easily be extended to cricket at all levels.
Critics might point out that additional angles will further add to the delays of waiting for a decision, but if there were two or even three Third Umpires constantly reviewing video footage they would be able to take advantage of these extra angles. This would be a large extra cost, but the costs could be picked up by the broadcasters and their sponsors, and perhaps even the players could chip in to subsidise a portion of the costs – after all, they stand to gain the most from consistently accurate umpire decisions.
No-balls and wides could also be accurately picked up with the use of an onscreen grid or lines on the umpire’s replay monitors. These would effectively ‘draw the line’ for no-balls, wides and run outs, thus ensuring greater accuracy, especially with the chance to review the action two to three times before the bowler bowls the next ball. These umpires would work autonomously to the onfield umpires - in other words, there should be no referrals. The onfield umpires would adjudicate to the fullest, trusting their own judgement to make correct calls as they see it, without worrying about making a mistake. Any ‘mistakes’ that can be picked up by the Third Umpires will be radioed in to the relevant umpire to change his decision. The Third Umpire will need to do so before the next ball is bowled, thus preventing time wastage. If they can’t prove that a decision was incorrect in the allotted time then the onfield umpire’s decision will stand and play will continue.
When a wicket falls or an appeal is made the Third Umpire should be able to request extra time to check more carefully before adjudicating on this more crucial decision. When a batsman is given out the Third Umpire would have until the batsman leaves the field to overrule the decision. The Third Umpire’s task would be to quickly review TV replays, using the extra overhead cameras and existing angles, to see if a glaring error was made.
We cannot achieve 100% accurate decisions with all decisions, but we could eliminate any glaring errors that would be picked up by the TV cameras, as well as providing a better judgement on LBW through the use of the overhead camera. If replays don’t provide conclusive proof then the onfield umpire’s original decision would stand, which thus reaffirms his role as an adjudicator and not just a middle-man between the players and an umpire in a TV booth.
Cricket can only be the better for such a system, and the Aerial Umpire could be extended to all sports for added visual appeal as well as for decision-making, notably rugby (forward passes, off-sides, conversions) and football (off-sides).
Having two to three Third Umpires would also ensure that no human errors are allowed by one man’s misjudgement. The Third Umpire is still making some shocking errors, even after repeatedly viewing clear footage, and is still under enormous pressure because his role is seen as being easier than that of the onfield umpire. The two or three Third Umpires would need to all view the relevant replay footage for dismissals and then agree on a decision. If they can’t agree without doubt that the onfield umpire erred then there is clearly further doubt, and the onfield umpire’s decision would stand. This further allows the onfield umpires to retain their decision-making power, with the assurance that the Third Umpires have a better view and the chance to review the play to eradicate possible errors.
Everyone benefits, and cricket is the winner.
To further speed up the process, the Third Umpire’s replays need to be separate to those seen by TV viewers, the latter showing more of the action for entertainment value. Third Umpires need their replay feeds to be focussed in to the critical moment of action and replayed back and forth quickly. The most telling piece of footage could then be highlighted for viewers once the decision has been made.
The umpires would also be viewing as a matter of course the no-ball line, and informing the umpire after every delivery if a no-ball was bowled but not called. Many batsmen are given out off no-balls, as these are not always easy for the onfield umpire to call correctly due to the bowler’s position on the crease and the angle from which the umpire is watching the crease. The Third Umpires will watch every delivery for a no-ball, but when a wicket falls they will specifically double-check to ensure that the ball was legitimate. This is essential for fair play and correct decisions. If a no-ball is called by the onfield umpire but is found, on review, to have been a fair delivery, then the no-ball will be overruled, with no extra runs or balls being awarded. If the batsman goes out on an incorrect no-ball call by the onfield umpire he will be given not out as he might have been disturbed or changed his shot on the basis of the call.
A further innovation could be to rotate the Third Umpires with the onfield umpires. The Third Umpire will be severely tested with constant replays and would welcome a ‘break’ out in the middle. It would also prevent the onfield umpire feeling ‘powerless’ due to the Third Umpire’s ability to overrule him, as the onfield umpire would periodically also have the power to do the overruling when he moves to the Third Umpire’s seat. Further, their original decisions would remain in the event of the Third Umpires not unanimously agreeing to overrule a decision. If anything, the onfield umpire’s powers and credibility would be strengthened under such a system.
Critics might argue that there will be a lack of consistency when compared to non-televised or less comprehensively televised games. My response is that the issue of controversy crops up most during televised matches that allow players and spectators to pick up on umpiring errors. It’s a case of horses for courses.
The Aerial Umpire would be an incredible assistance for run outs as it will provide a far superior view of the bat crossing the line and the stumps being broken. The keeper would almost never obscure the view from an aerial camera, as happens with side views, and the moment at which the bails are lifted would be totally clear.
The Aerial Umpire would also improve caught-behind decisions, as the Third Umpires would more clearly be able to see the exact point of deviation (especially in cases where the ball brushes the batsman’s shoulder, which, from the front, looks like an edge off the bat) as well as fine edges. From above you will clearly see if there is any deviation as well as the exact point it occurred in the ball’s flight path. From the front or from rear views the batsman’s bat obscures your vision of any deviation as it passes across the ball’s path.
The Aerial Umpire would revolutionise LBW decisions, as well as casting a whole new level of understanding of LBW and the ball’s flight path. This in turn would greatly educate and inform umpires at all levels, empowering them to adapt this new knowledge to umpiring at first-class, club and school level. Using a grid or line system indicating clearly the line from stump to stump will eradicate any undesirable guesswork from the Third Umpire as to the line the ball pitched and the exact line it struck the pads. We will also be able to clearly see the line of the ball and be in a better position to judge its likely path after it struck the pads. The aerial view will give an idea of the amount of swing and, based on the flight path from the bowler’s hand to the pad (a longer distance than from pad to stumps), we could more accurately predict if the ball would have held its line to hit the stumps. We might even find that balls pitching on off and striking the batsman in line of leg stump might be worthy of an LBW dismissal after all. We will not know until we start viewing decisions from above. Until then LBW will always remain a mystery and accurate decisions will never be possible. It would clearly eliminate a large area of doubt, speculation and guesswork which has arisen from decades of a one-dimensional view, that of judging LBW purely from a frontal perspective.
The aerial view remains the only frontier yet to be fully explored in televised sport, and it could be one of the most dramatic, not to mention facilitating a massive paradigm shift in understanding LBW, off-sides, forward passes and so on. It would also provide a more awe-inspiring view of the action and the players’ position on the field: think of a slip cordon standing way back to a fast bowler; fielding positions and the gaps in the field clear for all to see; offensive and defensive moves in rugby and football; court coverage in tennis. Pick a sport!
This will happen one day – I have no doubt. But why wait when it’s possible now, and can only benefit sportsmen, officials and spectators alike.
© SIMON LEWIS The Ball magazine
simon@theball.co.za • www.theball.co.za
0 comments:
Post a Comment