Making umpires accountable?

[aussie1st]

The Referees from Super 14 (rugby) are going to front the media after the match to answer questions about their decisions made on the field. Don't know how much it will achieve for Rugby since its pretty obvious if an error has been made and all you gain out of it is a "I'm wrong and I'm sorry".

Cricket on the other hand has a number of grey areas where even technology can't say if it was definitely wrong. Like those faint edges, did they hear a noise or did they see the ball deviate. The UDRS has taken out alot of the errors that would be asked but you could even ask the 3rd umpire why he gave that out/not out something which could have helped for the England v SA series.

While its not going to change the outcome of the game, its good to have the umpires being made accountable for their mistakes, instead of hiding behind closed doors.

 

[CG123]

Yeah, I think they should introduce a similar system to what super 14 is.
It doesn't need to be a full press conference, just a short interview when they're coming from the field.
But also it probably won't do much, as can't change a wrong decision, and they are always going to make mistakes.

 

[irottev]

I don't think this is needed. It just puts more pressure on umpires. Technology needs to come in ODIs and all tests. That's the most important thing.

 

[drainpipe32]

I'd hate to see referrals in LOIs. It would make it so slow.

 

[irottev]

In ODIs it's fine will only tag a few extra minutes on. Take 5 minutes out of the already long lunch/innings break. In T20 yeah not needed.

 

[Owzat]

How about ditching the drinks breaks if you want to take off unneccessary wasted time, and heavy penalties for taking too long over field settings and walking back to your mark.

Drinks breaks aren't necessary. Why? Because fielders are on and off all the time anyway and can get a drink from a sub on the boundary, the umpires can have drinks for themselves and the bowlers on them and the batsmen might have only just come to the crease at drinks, even the fielders might not be out there the full two hours, so having a fixed time break for drinks when it's not like say football where both sides play 45 mins, take a break and play 45 mins.

As for making umpires accountable, makes it sound too much 'pound of flesh' to me. Help them get decisions right rather than make them explain why they're human and make mistakes, use replays properly and not just a tactic "referral" system which was compounded by basic errors in technology and umpiring awareness. People moan about a missed no ball when there is a batsman's wicket at stake, but what about the ones missed through the normal course of a game at a cost of RUNS, extra deliveries etc - especially in ODIs?

I think a catch-up review system could be workable, where the TV umpire looks at no balls and potential wickets while the players get ready for the next ball and shouts "wait a sec" into the umpires earpiece if there is something he's not happy with. At wickets he does a standard check, there are natural pauses in play between balls and at wickets so why not use them.

 

[aussie1st]

Rugby referees will be made publicly accountable for their decisions in the immediate wake of Super 14 rugby matches this season.

For the first time, referees will be available for media questioning of their performance, a move designed to make the game's whistlers and their decisions more transparent.

New Zealand Rugby Union high performance referee manager Lyndon Bray said there was a desire to take some of the mystery out of rugby's laws, while the referees themselves have agreed they would like to be publicly measured.

"They (referees) have probably always been slightly threatened in the past by the concept of facing up on TV after games," Bray told Radio Sport.

"We've all acknowledged this is probably an important step. It brings us into line with the coaches and the players, who also have to do this."

Rugby: Referees to front up to media - Rugby - NZ Herald News

With the referees actually agreeing to front the ruthless NZ media, I really see no reason why the cricket umpires wouldn't do likewise if the system goes successfully. Currently we still have the same old umpires making their same old mistakes with no accountability. Its about time they are made accountable and to make the ICC look into improving the standards of umpiring.

 

[sohum]

Drinks breaks aren't necessary. Why? Because fielders are on and off all the time anyway and can get a drink from a sub on the boundary, the umpires can have drinks for themselves and the bowlers on them and the batsmen might have only just come to the crease at drinks, even the fielders might not be out there the full two hours, so having a fixed time break for drinks when it's not like say football where both sides play 45 mins, take a break and play 45 mins.

But what if he had not just come to the crease. What if he had come to the crease at the beginning of the session? Bowlers and fielders may get rehydrated during the course of play, but batsmen aren't necessarily. Don't forget how much armor batsmen where, either. What with all the guards and helmets, they are sweating a lot under there, and if you don't give them an opportunity to rehydrate, you're going to end up with a lot of batsmen retiring hurt.

 

[chapmanp]

If umpires are made accountable than will only have Aleem Dar and Simon Taufel on the elite panel

 

[sohum]

All umpires make mistakes.

More than making umpires accountable with the suggested method (which is basically a mandated apology to the public for making a bad decision), the ICC should closely monitor the performance of an umpire.

Captains reports should be taken very seriously. If players begin losing confidence in the umpiring, then you're going to be heading down a hell-hole if you continue to appoint those umpires.

Consider the cases of Asoka de Silva and Steve Bucknor. de Silva had been underperforming for months as an umpire before he was finally removed from the elite panel. Such high latency is not acceptable. de Silva is back umpiring international matches (not sure if he's back in the Elite Panel, yet) but his name has been forever tainted because he made so many poor decisions before the ICC gave him a break.

Steve Bucknor, is another case. The bloke was a top class umpire for most of his career and should have retired when he had first decided to. However, he decided to prolong his career by a few seasons and what ensued was the whole BCCI fiasco. The ICC needs to strengthen its requirements. Bucknor went on umpiring till he was over 60. Taufel, the best umpire in the game right now, is 39. Dar is 41. In fact, Bucknor was the last in the batch of umpires who went on forever. Shepherd, for example, umpired till he was in his 60's, as did Dickie Bird. Bucknor, IMO, did not adjust as well and since he was half a decade earlier than his compatriots, he felt the brunt of the modernization of the game that the likes of Shepherd retired before.

In short, introducing a post-match press conference where an umpire admits his mistakes and is grilled by the media isn't going to solve anything. It's just going to make the umpire feel worse and contribute to the diminishing number of quality international umpires. Instead, the ICC needs to be more flexible and liquid with its Elite Panel, and it also needs to expand it so that the umpires don't burn out.

 

[rahuldravidfan]

Press-conferences will make it worse. Umpires are already under a lot of pressure and get a lot of stick from the players and crowd alike. Anything more and we might most possibly see a strike.