The most recent legislation introduced of TV referrals came as a debatable move. Players, experts, commentators and fans are widely divided upon the move. During this thread I’d like to forward my recommendations on the matter but firstly allow me to take this opportunity to analyse the various disputes surrounding the dilemma.
The regulation stated: “If there was enough convincing evidence the on field decision could be over turned”. As M . Atherton so correctly mentioned on commentary if we wanted to invest in technology we must trust and rely on the devices available to the full and make the decisions accordingly to the technology and simply ignore the disturbing evidence theory.
However one has to consider the amount of time lost in the match. Also in a way it takes the authority of the standing umpire making their position a laughing stock which is rather pointless.
But we have to take into account that the sport industry is modernising and therefore why shall cricket not utilise the variety of resources available? Plus don’t we want to make decisions correctly to satisfy everyone’s needs and prevent a dismissal frustration which could be constructive in the overall outcome?
Overall I would like to draw a conclusion that players should not have any input what so ever on decision making as their function is to play and not question the gestures of umpires. Also with players input its taking valuable time out of the game. Although there is a limit this can be considered unfair as an obvious fault in decision making may have occurred and players weren’t able to refer. I feel that it should either be a private consultation with standing and 3rd umpire to double check decisions as that will be more logical and time saving i.e. the third umpire wants to double-check if the ball had pitched outside the line. Otherwise I don’t see the purpose and would want it to be scrapped by the administrators. It's going to be highly controversial otherwise and develop into a nightmare for one to dispute upon.
8 years ago