Neutral Umpires 'Not the answer'

Umpiring is about competence and not about nationality, says Barbados-born British Test cricket umpire John Holder.

Giving his views on the use of 'neutral umpires' for international matches, Holder, who is in Barbados as part of a team producing a cricket video, suggested that more emphasis should be placed on competency rather than so-called neutrality.

'The most important thing to me is to be able to do the job properly.'

'Umpiring is about competence,' he said, noting that the reputation of umpires was always on the line.

Holder, who has stood in ten Tests and 17 One-Day Internationals, was recently restored to the panel of English Test umpires after not standing in a Test for nine years.

Technology caution

Pakistan and Australia are to tour England later this year, playing two Tests and five Tests respectively, and he expects to be selected for at least one of those five-day matches.

Asked about the virtues of the third umpire and the increasing use of technology in the game over the past ten years, Holder warned that international cricket authorities should be wary of displacing standing umpires.

'The use of the third umpire in many ways is beneficial, but when you start having the third umpire determine all the decisions you could well have a robot in the middle,' he said.

Holder contended that umpiring around the world had not fallen below standards that existed ten to 15 years ago but the prevalence of technology had certainly placed them in an awkward position.

'You can only give what you see at normal speed,' he said in reference to criticisms by others who had the benefit of slow-motion replays and other technologies.

Holder also condemned the use of big screens around cricket grounds and suggested that incessant slow-motion replays of contentious decisions could incite unruly spectators and create situations dangerous to standing umpires.