'We're a strange bunch'

An eight-year-old boy, on his first day in school in Adelaide, noticed that one of his teachers was a Mrs Harper, and asked her if he could meet Daryl, the cricket umpire. The boy, who had just come to Australia from the sleepy little town of Vellore in South India, actually had a picture of Daryl Harper up on his bedroom wall back home. For Harper, it was one of those moments that made the long hours, the lack of recognition or money at every level but the highest, and all the criticism worth the while.

"People think the umpire's life is a totally lonely and boring one but it isn't that way. We're a strange bunch," Harper told Wisden Cricinfo. "Who would take on such a job and open themselves to such criticism? We have a great brotherhood among us umpires and officials and it keeps us going."

Which begs the question, why does someone take to umpiring? "It's never the money. You wouldn't get into umpiring if you hadn't enjoyed playing cricket at some stage. You either have cricket in the blood or you don't. When you first pick up a coat, a tie and counter you certainly don't have money on your mind."

In some countries, there's a tradition of former Test cricketers taking to umpire. Venkat from India was one who believed it helped to be a former Test cricketer, if not in making decisions, in getting the respect of the players and keeping matters under check out in the middle. But Harper says: "I don't really think it matters whether you've player 50 Tests or only club cricket. So long as you have played some cricket and enjoyed the competitive nature of cricket, you'll be all right. I think having played Test cricket actually makes a huge difference in your ability to pick a bat-pad or adjudicate an lbw. Some decisions might be more acceptable to commentators if it came from someone who had played Test cricket. A former Test cricketer may get a bit more benefit of doubt on the close calls."

One of the big problems for umpires is the number of former cricketers sitting in commentary boxes with numerous tools that help them get closer to the game than perhaps even the standing umpires. And this brings the debate about the use of technology - both in broadcasting and in actually helping the umpires in decision making - into sharp focus.

"I think it's a big entertainment package," says Harper. "TV networks and commentators have to come up with innovations and technology that can bring the game better to the people. I think umpires have the right mix of technology available to them at the moment. But if you go much further down the road then there wouldn't be much use having an umpire out there.

"It is a game played between two teams. If you really want no mistakes at all, then sure, let technology take over completely. Cricket is a great character builder, and part of that comes from little things. When you play as a child, you may field all day and not get a bat the next or be out in a hurry. You have to have great patience in cricket. I'd hate to see the more human elements disappear from cricket."

Umpires are now more and more in the news for decisions that they make because there is so much at stake. It's not uncommon to see a report scathing in its criticism of the umpire. "Some people never really tear into an umpire because they have too much respect for the game," says Harper. "There are some that do that. Personally I don't like to see my name mentioned in reports because that usually means I've made a mistake. Maybe I'm setting myself up for a bit of a fall here, but I don't expect to get 100% of my decisions right. I'm not aiming for perfection, but I am aiming for excellence."