THE claim by many of the ICC umpires that excessive appealing is tantamount to cheating has been, not unexpectedly, strongly denied by some of the International captains.
While it may not be cheating exactly, it certainly reeks of gamesmanship and a desire to place the umpires under such pressure that their decisions may favour the appealing team.
It is a blight on the game at present and certainly not in the spirit of the game, if such a thing still exists.
Umpires are having it tough these days and their lot is not being helped by repeated TV replays and rather harsh judgments by the commentators.
In reality the umpiring is no worse and may even be better in some countries than it was in the past. The difficulty these days which compounds the umpires' woes is the TV replays.
If the replays are so good perhaps the time has come to at least examine widening the use of TV umpire decision, if it is going to assist the game.
Australia and other countries are at present looking at new technology to see whether they are conclusive enough to be used for LBW and caught behind decisions.
At present no matter how much the TV people and commentators talk it up, the available technology doesn't solve the problems in this area.
It is interesting to remember that well before TV replays were used for run outs and stumping, the TV experts were calling for their introduction. Yet, when the call was answered, they for a time ducked for cover, saying that the present coverage was not good enough for such a purpose and they would need better and more cameras to be as accurate as necessary.
As these decisions are often subjected to different interpretations and if a player is in the line between the camera and the stumps the decision is often impossible to accurately arrive at.
I am in favour of the present TV decision making and have an open mind to further future use.
How far into the future the technology will be improved is impossible to predict and the problems we have at present have to be tackled.
I feel that the players do have much to answer for in this regard.
Excessive appealing and dissent by players is rampant. I have never had much sympathy with batsmen ranting, raving and complaining about decisions by the umpires, even if it is done in the privacy of the dressing room.
My attitude and advice to them was always - don't feel sorry for yourself if you get a bad decision when you have been appealing excessively in the hope of forcing the umpire into a decision to favour your team when fielding.
To me there was never ever any advantage in disputing decisions as umpires are only human and if they feel badly towards you or your team because of bad behaviour they may favour the opposition.
I have no doubt Australia drew a Test some years ago when they should have won because the skipper got right up the nose of the umpires and one of them refused to give vital decisions in favour of the Australian team.
Sure, the umpire should not have let personal feelings affect his decisions, but he is human and should be respected.
Abusing umpires is also not on and I have often pondered as to how the players would feel if the umpire called down the pitch, "How on earth could you have played such a shot?" or sent the batsman on his way with - "that is the worst shot I have ever seen."
While TV may play a bigger role in the future a major responsibility now lies on the captains and players to assist the cause for better umpiring decisions.
Some of the Test captains went on record at the ICC Captains meeting by saying - "the officials' job is to make the rules and the captains' responsibility is to test the rules to the advantage of their teams."
While such views exist, life will be tough for the man in the white coat in the middle. I am certainly not advocating that batsmen should walk when they think they are out. Throughout my cricketing career I saw too many so called "walkers" leave the crease when it was obvious they were out or they had done well or the team was not in trouble. But they hung around generally with their backs to the umpire if they were having a bad trot and only got a fine nick to the ball.
This caused more bad feelings between teams and placed greater pressure on the umpire, particularly if the "known walker" was a high profile player.
Umpires will tell you they prefer the batsman to watch for the decision and then go, even if he thinks he has been unlucky. Invariably, these decisions seem to even themselves out, particularly now with the international panel operating.
Captains must play a major role in this area. They can stop pre-arranged appeals, they can stop fielders running at the umpires and they can stop dissent.
Indeed under ICC regulations they are held responsible for the behaviour of the team.
It is no good (though it would be a start), for one or two captains to try it, but it would be better if at the next ICC Captains' meeting they pledged themselves and the team to remedy these concerns.
They would also do much for the whole of cricket, for what happens in the first class arena is now beamed through television to every man playing the game.
They watch and copy everything their heroes do, good and bad and believe me if you think some of the behaviour at the first class level is bad, it is often much worse down the line.
Indeed, the recent under-19 World Championship in South Africa was considered by experienced watchers as the worst in terms of player behaviour they had ever seen, and this was not restricted to just one or two teams or even the high profile elevens.
Comments
SHARE