View Full Version : 3rd Umpire to be used more under new ICC rules
CarterS
19 Mar 2002, 20:02
Under an experimental rule the 3rd Umpire will be used more often.
Thanks to Guardian Unlimited Sport's article (http://sport.guardian.co.uk/cricket/story/0,10069,669957,00.html)....
· Leg-before appeals where the ball may have pitched outside leg-stump
· Catches which pass between bat and pad
· Hook shots which deflect off either glove or body
· Suspected bump-balls
· Bowlers overstepping
Apparantly 9 out of 10 decisions will be made in 10 seconds or less which, if they can achieve that, is great. The 3rd Umpire will not however be able to intervene on his own accord which is a good thing considering (imagine a 3rd umpire stopping a match mid ball and giving the batsman out from a controversial LBW the ball before).
They dropped the figure of 60% of decisions umpires get right in difficult situations and this hopefully will lift that rate. Good stuff ICC, improving the game with the times.
I think the most important thing there is the under 10 seconds in relation to making decisions.
I dont really have a problem with it - after all we want the decisions to be right - just as long as it doesn't take to much time to make a decision.
Plus, how often will they go to the third umpire now - every second over?? every over?? - if it can be used for overstepping, they could go to it every ball.
I think it should only be used for important things such as wickets, not something like no balls. If they get it wrong its only one run - who really cares. (Admittedly a no ball when there was none leads to an extra ball, and if that extra ball yields a wicket, than it is costly, but the odds of that happening are low)
The third ump can't even tell if a catch carried or not how can you trust him for this stuff. I say leave it as is unless they are willing to put in an extra couple of cameras.
CarterS
19 Mar 2002, 22:25
Originally posted by hourn
I dont really have a problem with it - after all we want the decisions to be right - just as long as it doesn't take to much time to make a decision.[b]
That's true you don't want to slow it down.
[b]I think it should only be used for important things such as wickets, not something like no balls. If they get it wrong its only one run - who really cares. (Admittedly a no ball when there was none leads to an extra ball, and if that extra ball yields a wicket, than it is costly, but the odds of that happening are low)
You raise a good point but however I don't think it will be used for such little things as no balls, but when there is a wicket off a possible no ball will be an issue looked at by the 3rd umpire I think. How many times over the summer have we seen a wicket only to reveal a few balls later that the bowler stepped over the line? I think it is implying that the 3rd Umpire could do a quick check to check if the bowler was stepping over the popping crease or not.
Plus, how often will they go to the third umpire now - every second over?? every over?? - if it can be used for overstepping, they could go to it every ball.
Apprarantly the ICC are reducing the number of umpires on their expert panel so the Umps that are actually on it will be confident enough in their own abilities no to have to resort to the 3rd umpire every second over.
And again, I don't think it will be used to check if a no ball was really a no ball or something.
Nige_Bix
21 Mar 2002, 15:01
Personally, I would go the other way and restrict the number of ways the 3rd umpire can be used - run outs and stumpings is as far as I would like to go.
Re No-balls - I can't imagine the umpire in the middle calling for the 3rd umpire for that - and certainly if the 3rd umpire is not allowed to intervene then that one wouldn't happen.
Nige_Bix
23 Mar 2002, 23:00
I have since read this ....
"The ICC have announced that the on-field umpires will be able to refer ANY decision to a TV replay during this September's Champions Trophy in Sri Lanka."
Click the link to read more....
http://www.cricket365.com/news/news.html/cl/ENG?ref=18768
Mudassar Nazar says "great"
http://www.cricket365.com/news/news.html/cl/ENG?ref=18815
Anthony Pascoe from Cricket365 says "no!"
http://www.cricket365.com/features/topic/topic.html/cl/ENG?feature=topic
I personally can't believe that cricket has resorted to this. I guess time will tell how effective it is and whether it will detract from the spontaneity and spirit of the game.:confused: