Umpire Decision Review System: India must review its position

Should we stop using electricity fearing electric shocks?

The 2011 world cup will be played with a provision to implement the much controversial Umpire Decision Review System (UDRS). The system evolved was an outcome of the desire to make the game umpiring error free that many a times affect the outcome of matches. In the past, there were several occasions when umpires have committed some serious blunders while taking decisions on the field. Sometimes these decisions affect the result of the game or personal records of individual players. UDRS was ICC’s innovative idea to use the technology available to address these issues but the program has become controversial even before it is fully implemented.

When technology available was not so advanced, all decisions on the ground were taken by the two umpires of the game. It was contentious to decide close run outs or catch claims. But the final decision used to rest with the umpires. Later when TV reviews were available, it had to be used by making a provision for 3rd umpire in the match and close decisions were taken effectively. With cricket becoming more popular and accessible on televisions, more and more people started watching the game closely. Not just the spectators but the team support staffs too started using the TV telecast to analyse the game sharply. The broadcasters too, eying the prospect revenues out of live cricket telecast, tried to better the television viewing experience of the viewers. Multiple replays, slow motion, zoom etc. brought revolution to the live match viewing. While it made the cricket viewing better, it also created new difficulties for the cricket administrators. As everyone could view and re-view each and every ball of the game (add ball by ball analysis of commentators), the faults by umpires which were earlier difficult to even detect were now questioned. Newer and more technological advancements by broadcasters led to more doubts over umpires’ decisions.

It is absolutely understandable that such decision making errors are not always umpires’ faults. Being human beings it is not strange to make mistakes. Except few occasions, the decisions that are doubted are very close ones and anybody in the place of the umpire could have committed the same mistake. But when such decisions affect the results, it is a matter to worry. It is really baffling why technology shouldn’t be used if it is available and can make the sport error-free.

India is one of the cricketing countries that are vocal against the implementation of the UDRS. Indian board which is also the game’s financial powerhouse has blocked the full implementation so far. Officially, it questions the reliability of the system. It also cites reasons like degradation of Umpire’s power and stature in the game if the system is implemented. Several other umpires also believe that UDRS undermines the position of the umpires. All these reasons are far from logic. If reliability of a particular technology is made an issue, then all roads of further improvement will be blocked. Even the use of electricity is not 100% reliable. Should we stop using electricity fearing electric shocks? And how is a technology made more reliable? Of course by using it more and more so that it is tested at each level.

Similarly claiming that UDRS system undermines umpires’ authority only creates emotional waves but does not address the problem of umpiring errors. Doesn’t making several wrong judgement in a single match and general people questioning the decisions shameful for an umpire? In such cases, it is obvious that fans doubt the umpire in question’s integrity and capabilities: not something a self respecting umpire would like hear such comments. So it’s better when umpire’s wrongs are corrected in the same match and the worthy batsman gets the chance to play more or the worthy bowler gets the wicket he deserves. In the whole process, the umpires get better too.

More shocking is the media reports that BCCI opposes the review system because of some totally different reasons. As per these reports, Indian team is not happy with the system because most of their referrals went against them and rival team’s referrals worked mostly. Reports have also suggest that Master blaster Sachin Tendulkar too isn’t happy with UDRS as he was at the receiving end of the failed referrals. If true, this is unfortunate. Just because such things happened in one series, it doesn’t mean that it will always happen with a particular team/ batsman. Even referrals going against the team may be attributed to lack of the skills to make smart referrals. English and Australian players have mastered such skills as the bowlers/ batsmen of these teams always follow several steps (like asking teammates first) before referring a decision.

When Steve Buckner gave several wrong decision against the Indian side, the powerful BCCI managed to exclude Buckner from the matches India plays. But this didn’t solve the problem. Even today many teams including India have to face the problem. The only and most reliable option in front of the cricket administration is to implement the decision review strongly. In fact, if you ask me, I believe the current three referrals per side should be abolished. And the match should totally be brought under the review system. Every time an umpire makes a mistake, third umpire (who watches the match from the TV and in most cases is free throughout the match) corrects the decision immediately. After all, the third umpire is not there to enjoy vacations. India must review its stand on the UDRS. Being the powerful in the cricket fraternity, it must behave responsibly in the interest of the game. With great powers comes great responsibility, as they say.

Final Reads : 338