Accountability of umpires and referees and rogue umpiring (16 July 1997)

Wednesday 16, July 1997

Accountability of umpires and referees and rogue umpiring

Comment from the Daily News

Regular sub-standard umpiring decisions during recent times prompts me to air the views of a substantial section of cricket enthusiasts who urge immediate corrective action. This parlous state of affairs during Sri Lanka's tour of Australia in 1995/6 and New Zealand in 1997. Some initially thought that the ball tampering, chucking, caught off a dead ball controversies were isolated instances. This is unfortunately not so. The same questionable umpiring has continued. The Indian cricket authorities have called an umpire who stood in the India vs England Test series last summer ``a racist'' and will take up allegations against him with the I.C.C. to delete him from the International Panel. Why is Ian Robinson of Zimbabwe - a survivor of the Ian Smith regime, always assigned for Sri Lanka matches ? He is a mediocrity at best and his intentions questionable.

The system of appointing umpires to the international panel is suspect and untenable. The nine Test playing countries are requested to nominate two umpires each. It is found that the standard of umpiring in each country differs and there is a wide disparity in the quality of umpiring. It is patently obvious that the best umpires in the cricket circuit are not in the international panel. Some mediocrities have crept in due to a naive system. It is suggested that the international panel be divided into Grade A and Grade B umpires on the basis of performance. With T.V. replays available performance could easily be monitored. Controlling Boards should be instructed to report instances of bad and questionable umpiring substantiated with T.V. replays. A new system of appointment, promotion, relegation and dismissal of umpires should be introduced with ACCOUNTABILITY as the main theme.

The Aamer Sohail incident underpinned the lack of accountability of umpires. Sohail was punished for showing dissent. It was patently obvious to those watching that the leg umpire was the first offender by not calling that ball which was way above Sohail's shoulder a no ball. The umpire goes scot free and Sohail is punished. We see glaring instances of dissent by bowlers when their appeals are turned down. In this regard Shane Warne is a regular offender. Why only action against batsmen ? Cannot the Referee see these, if we can ? Punitive action for bad or questionable umpiring should be introduced by way of fines and minus points for each offence. This will introduce that very important principle of ACCOUNTABILITY to umpiring.

With the relentless commercialisation of the game of cricket, a sinister feature now emerging, is ROGUE UMPIRING. I watched a surfeit of cricket in Australia last summer. The number of rogue umpiring decisions during the West Indies vs Australia series boggled my imagination. One startling decision was when Mark Taylor was bowled by Walsh. The umpire called ``no ball'' after the ball hit the stumps. The T.V. replay on the wide screen at the M.C.G showed that it was not a no ball and the T.V. commentators confirmed this. During the first three tests of the last West Indies vs Australia series of the 11 lbw decisions 9 were against the West Indies and 2 against Australia. The 2 against Australia were given by neutral umpires! Brian Lara was the victim of two stunning rogue umpiring decisions - hit wicket; and caught behind when the ball did not carry to Healy.

While we will have to live with mediocre umpiring until new systems are introduced and rigidly enforced immediate punitive action should be taken against rogue umpiring on evidence already available. Has heavy betting which has sadly come to the game of cricket have had any influence on this new trend ? I am sure the I.C.C. under the dynamic leadership of the charismatic Jagmohan Dalmiya will introduce the principle ACCOUNTABILITY OF UMPIRES AND REFEREES.

Source :: Daily News (https://www.lanka.net)