International cricket's seminal seminar
From all reports, the ICC played the role oflisteners, while the umpires and referees played the role oftalkers
Partab Ramchand
28-Mar-2002
For long, former greats have hit out at the game's administrators
for doing precious little in the interests of the game and the
cricketers. They have accused the officials of sitting in an
ivory tower, being out of touch with reality and changing trends,
taking a paid vacation and indulging in power politics. But of
late, even the most vociferous critic would have found the need
to change this aggressive tune to a softer note, as the
International Cricket Council (ICC) has taken steps to improve
the game's image of the game, which has taken quite a beating in
recent times.
From all reports, the ICC played the role of listeners, while the umpires and referees played the role of talkers. And then, as Speed put it, changes were made on the basis of what the umpires and referees spoke about. "We asked for their views, and they gave frank opinions which we've taken on board," he said. |
Speed, speaking on the last day of the ICC umpires and referees
conference near Cape Town, said it was of vital importance that
umpires and referees act as major ambassadors for the game in
the future. "This has been a very important initiative for the
ICC, and for cricket generally, because the umpires in particular
are our best ambassadors," Speed is quoted to have said. "What we
have here are people who've been doing these jobs part-time and
now coming in to do them full-time. They've been very willing
workers over quite an arduous programme that we've put together.
I hope these guys go away from here with the sense that they are
major ambassadors for the game. If we've achieved that, then it's
been worthwhile."
In an effort to improve the game's standards, the ICC recently
appointed an elite panel of five international match referees and
eight umpires to stand as neutral officials in all Test matches.
All these officials attended the deliberations at Cape Town.
Whether all available technology should be extended to aid
umpires in making decisions is a debate that has generated
considerable heat for some time now. There have been two schools
of thought on this. One feels that the present system should be
continued and that the umpires should take some decisions on
their own. The other school is firmly of the view that, with the
technology now available, umpires and the game in general
would benefit if the views of the TV officials are obtained in
case of any doubt. At Cape Town, the eight umpires on the panel
agreed to experiment with extended TV technology to aid umpiring
decisions. This will first be tried out during the ICC Champions
Trophy in Sri Lanka this September.
Among other issues addressed by the seminar were: tolerance of
player behaviour, understanding of playing conditions, and legal
implications to be considered when disciplinary charges are
leveled against a player. These contentious issues have
negatively affected the image of the game for some time now, and
the fact that the officials, with the concurrence of the ICC, met
the problem head-on is undoubtedly a step in the right direction.
From all reports, the ICC played the role of listeners, while the
umpires and referees played the role of talkers. And then, as
Speed put it, changes were made on the basis of what the umpires
and referees spoke about. "We asked for their views, and they
gave frank opinions which we've taken on board," he said. Little
wonder then that there has been a more marked sense of trust
between the officials and the ICC than in the past. What is more,
according to Speed, similar seminars are now likely to be an
annual feature. This alone would prove that the ICC is striving
for greater professionalism at all levels. Indeed, the ICC chief
executive hailed this as "a start of a new era," while admitting
that the ICC needed to work hard to be recognised as a respected
governing body for a major sport.
Highlighting the importance of their jobs, Speed, a qualified
lawyer himself, said that umpires and referees who officiate at
international matches would have 24-hour access to legal help if
players objected to decisions. The ICC would no doubt be
especially concerned if the officials were to encounter problems
enforcing the disciplinary code put into force recently. Referees
can, for example, impose financial penalties on players who show
dissent. The new disciplinary code has four categories, ranging
from offences such as dissent to possible life bans for violent
behavior or threats of violence. Given the nature of player power
these days, it is heartening to note that the ICC has this
aspect, which could prove to be vital, covered.
There is no need to underline the importance of the deliberations
and decisions taken at the seminar given the turbulent times that
the game has seen, particularly in recent times. What the ICC is
obviously looking for is a far-reaching approach, and hopefully
this will be the start of a more consistent process of giving
umpires and referees the kind of professional training they have
never had before in tackling the growing problems plaguing
cricket.