Reviews changing the name of the game
Kevin Mitchell believes that the advent of the UDRS has irrevocably marred the on-field bonhomie between players and umpires, in the process taking away an integral aspect of the game
Nitin Sundar
25-Feb-2013
Kevin Mitchell believes that the advent of the UDRS has irrevocably marred the on-field bonhomie between players and umpires, in the process taking away an integral aspect of the game. Writing in the Guardian, Mitchell rues that “in the blink of a Hawk-Eye, cricket has changed forever”.
There, surely, is no going back to the chummy days of yore, when Ian Botham and Allan Lamb felt comfortable popping a mobile phone into the pocket of Dickie Bird's long white coat and getting someone to ring it when Beefy was coming in to bowl.
Those were warm-hearted, innocent times. Cajoling and schmoozing the umpire was part of the art, and players and officials had a rapport built up over seasons of kidding and winking. Most of the umpires had played county cricket themselves; they not only knew the tricks, they had used them.
Mike Atherton, writing in the Times, on a similar note, says the thrill of the game has been lost as a result of the UDRS. He believes the emphasis on perfectionism threatens to rob the game off its natural charm.
Those who were at Edgbaston in 2005 will tell their grandchildren about the atmosphere at the winning moment of that match: the moment when Stephen Harmison got a lifter to brush the bottom glove of Michael Kasprowicz to seal victory for England over Australia by two runs. Under the new system the drama of the moment would probably have been lost. Andrew Flintoff would not have hoisted Michael Vaughan, to have the captain near rip off his ears in ecstasy, because both would have been waiting for the review.
Nitin Sundar is a sub-editor at ESPNcricinfo