Fundamental flaws in cricket's decision review system
04/01/10 09:33 AM

Kenny Rogers would recognise a thing or two in cricket's technology-fuelled referral system. And captains will soon heed the lesson of 'The Gambler': You got to know when to hold 'em, know when to fold 'em.

At its best Ricky Ponting showed a correctly used referral to be the equivalent of trumping with the joker. At its worst Pakistan flagrantly wasted a limited commodity on wishful thinking.

The collection of test matches played under the Umpire Decision Review System thus far has had a less expected effect. Rather than routinely undermining umpires it has rather delightfully illuminated the character of the players.

From the selfish, the impetuous and impatient to the hoodwinkers, desperados and downright delusional.

Sportsmen tend to see precisely what they want to and stand belligerently convinced in the face of an alternate reality.

There are fundamental flaws in the system. Primarily that it uses devices conceived to entertain and enhance a television production in the adjudication of the game.

But the cricket fraternity, led by commentators, had worked itself into such a frenzy that it could no longer accept incorrect decisions.

So like every other sport that has turned to technology, cricket pretends a two-dimensional image can represent a three-dimensional world beyond reasonable doubt.

The early workings were poor.

In Adelaide the system failed more alarmingly than any standing umpire. Shiv Chanderpaul was given out, caught behind, on an overrule of English umpire Mark Benson's original decision.

Beyond Shane Watson's assertion "I was sure he hit it" heard on the stump microphone, there was no such evidence from the replays to substantiate the belief. It was the sort of decision only an NRL video ref could have posted.

The Perth test was ended on a referral. Billy Bowden adjudged Kemar Roach caught behind. Video evidence could find no evidence of the edge. But the system ties itself in knots. The third umpire couldn't definitively rule out the possibility of an edge and thus the original decision stood.

Most unsatisfactory.

While technology has long been worshipped by television broadcasters and presented as infallible, once on trial it has failed routinely. Hot Spot is apparently thermo imaging used in modern warfare. By losing forces I'd say. But it's the players that are most exposed.

In the opening test of the summer, senior West Indian batsmen Chris Gayle and Chanderpaul revealed their sense of entitlement, senselessly burning challenges on LBW decisions that went against them. They saw themselves as their team's only hopes.

Adrian Barath changed that with a Gabba century. Gayle started to believe and behave like a captain, and the Windies became a competitive and cohesive unit.

In Adelaide, Australia shot off its challenges early on day four. When Doug Bollinger most needed a referral for a LBW shout he was left kicking the pitch and forfeiting his cash. The Australians should have been kicking themselves.

By the Boxing Day test Australia had learned the lesson of judiciousness.

On the second last ball of the second day, Pakistan captain Mohammad Yousuf fended at a ball down leg side. Keeper Brad Haddin and Ponting from midwicket intuitively sensed the contact between glove and ball.

Umpire Billy Doctrove understandably gave the benefit of the doubt to the batsman. But the super slowmo illustrated the kiss.

Australia had played its joker and profoundly strengthened its hand in the match.

In the second dig, Ponting did the same prompting the departure of Imran Farhat after an ultra conservative LBW knock back from Rudi Koertzen.

By contrast Pakistan, blinded by enthusiasm during a stirring revival, frittered away its wild cards on LBW shouts that had pitched outside leg stump or come from an inside edge. So unrealistic were the referrals, it made you question whether the protagonists knew the appropriate rules.

Among the benefits of the new system is a knock on tennis knows. On-field behaviour improves noticeably.

Vociferous appealing intended to intimidate and overwhelm an umpire - used tactically by Australian sides under Steve Waugh - will become redundant. If you think you've been hard done by, refer, otherwise shut the hell up.

The additional level of checks and balances should also end the convention preventing umpires standing in Tests involving their country of origin.

Chief among the failures is the betrayal of the paying public. While tennis harnesses the energy and tension of the challenge as all eyes on centre court turn to the big screen for the verdict, cricket treats its crowd as mugs. Deliberations are masked by a decision pending announcement.

The MCG crowd routinely broke into a chant of "boring" while it waited in the dark.

If cricket administrators believe in the absolutes of their system, they should have the courage to let the participants and the crowd share in the review as the television audience does.

At a time when Test cricket is desperate to enhance the live spectacle it can ill afford to treat the keepers of the faith with such contempt.

Source: ABC