e diel, 6 janar 2008

Aussies and ICC, Feel Ashamed

Seven contentious decisions during five days of cricket. Six in favour of the Aussies, one in favour of India. Shivnarine Chanderpaul once said, during an informal chat, if umpires don't rule all the 50-50 decisions, and is some cases even 40-60, in Australia's favour, most of the Test teams can beat them. OK, that could be said to be exaggeration, but Australia would certainly not win as many games as they do.
I personally have always felt that we should consider that umpires are also human, and that they can have a bad day, but Steve Bucknor and Mark Benson did a horrendous job. Why oh why did Mark Benson not ask the Third Umpire whether or not Michael Clarke's catch off Ganguly on the final day was clean or not? What on Earth is the Third Umpire for? To sit in an unconditioned room and to watch the match from any angle he wants and get paid for it, without having to do any work? Benson asking Ricky Ponting whether or not the ball touched the ground before the catch was taken was like asking a child whether or not he broke the glass. I'm even disappointed with Ricky Ponting. As skipper of the best team in the world, he is a representative of the the sport. As a true sportsman, he should have asked Benson to ask the Third Umpire whether or not the ball carried to Michael Clarke. Ponting has said that nobody can question his integrity, but sadly, he has given us reasons to. The Indian team management let the Umpires off when they decided not to lodge a complaint against them after Day one of the match. I don't see how the Umpires would escape their ire this time around.
As for Michael Clarke, all I want say is the he is a disgrace to the game. He exemplifies the fact that cricket is no longer the gentleman's game. He should have told the umpire he is doubtful whether or not he took the catch and asked him to check with the third umpire. He has been hailed as Ricky Ponting's heir as captain of the Australian team. This incident makes me feel worried that in the future the World Champion's (if they remain so) skipper would not be an ideal person to represent the sport. He would be idolised by thousands of wannabe kids, who would unfortunately learn anything but how to play the game fairly so cricket may be the winner at the end of the day. And not just this incident alone, looking back at the moment he was caught off Kumble's bowling on Day IV, he stood at the crease waiting for Steve Bucknor, who seemed to have gone to sleep, to adjudge him out. Surely he couldn't have thought Bucknor would not give him out for that, unless he had bribed Bucknor. Maybe it just goes to show that, after the umpires poor performance during the match, he was hopeful that Bucknor may just decide that the ball somehow magically turned towards Dravid at slip in mid air, without any contact with the bat.
The last bit I have saved for the Third Umpire. With the amount of replays he had at his disposal, giving an incorrect decision is absolutely unacceptable. The only areas where human error can creep in in his job is eyesight, and pressing the right button. If the case was the first, sack him immediately. If the case was the second, still sack him immediately. He ruined the match with that blooper. Symonds would have been out on 48, well before the 162he went on to score, and Australia would have been reeling. In that case, the final day would have probably seen Australia trying to snatch a draw rather than India. Shamefully, this match would be remembered not for the cricket played, but for the poor standards of umpiring.

Nuk ka komente: