
You can read the regulations regarding referrals here but the wording is:
He shall only be entitled to reverse the decision if it is beyond reasonable doubt that the on field umpire had made a clear and obvious mistake.
There are three words in there that are subjective - reasonable, clear and obvious - which mean that the 3rd umpire will continue to back the on-field umpires even when they think the decision was probably wrong.
Yesterday, Mustard was given out LBW to a ball that pitched outside leg stump. We should reflect on the fact that if in doubt, the umpire should rule in favour of the batsman, so that decision should definitely have been not out, but the decision wasn't referred in time. The game was changed with that first wrong decision, and was then followed up with a second one, when Tremlett trapped Chanderpaul LBW for 18. Warne had agreed that he was unlikely to refer a decision before the game, and he didn't, but once again, the game had been changed.
So what we can say is that Durham played very well, but they are going to win a game that was - for the umpteenth time - influenced by luck for individual players as a result of poor decisions. Is the most important thing that the umpires don't lose face, or is it more important that the correct decisions are made? For me, it is the latter by an infinite distance.
No comments:
Post a Comment