The Umpire Decision Review System not being used in two current series provides a perfect example of the ICC's dysfunctional nature, writes Ian Chappell
The Umpire Decision Review System not being used in two current series provides a perfect example of the ICC's dysfunctional nature, writes Ian Chappell Sachin Tendulkar walks back to the pavilion dejected after a referral is turned down during Day One of the third and final Test against Sri Lanka at the Pu00a0 Saravanamuttu Stadium in Colombo on August 8, 2008. Tendulkar asked for a review after being adjudged leg before off Dammika Prasad. PIC/AFP
There's no better example of the dysfunctional nature of international cricket administration than the UDRS ufffd Umpire Decision Review System.
In late 2009 the ICC informed us the UDRS was a crucial component in ensuring the correct decision was reached on the field. Now, here we are in mid-2010 and two Test series are going to be completed without the use of the UDRS.
There are different reasons for no UDRS in the Pakistan vs Australia and the Sri Lanka v India series. In the former, Pakistan (the home Board) say they can't afford the system and in the latter India doesn't want it. So what are the chances of ensuring the correct decisions are made on the field if there appears little likelihood of reaching consensus off it?
A farce
The problem is the chairman of each individual cricket Board meet as the ICC and agree on a direction for the game and then promptly head off and act in the best interest of the individual Board they are representing. It's as if they gather in the huddle as a tight-knit group before the match and then instead of dispersing to perform as a cricket team they play a game of tug-of-war.u00a0u00a0
The outgoing president of the ICC, David Morgan recently said: "The recruitment of additional independent directors would improve corporate governance."
His assertion is correct but the comment would seem less like the log in the kids playgroundu00a0-- hollowu00a0-- if, in addition to taking steps to achieve the aim of a more independent ICC Board it was complemented by a move to also have that body as the overall ruling authority in the game.
Whether you agree with the UDRS or not and there are plenty of scouts in each camp, surely every Test series has to be played under the same set of laws and playing conditions. Firstly, on the basis that there should be justice for all players, then for the integrity of Test cricket's statistics and finally so the officials aren't made to look like right nongs.
There's much to be sorted out with the UDRS if it's to become widely accepted as a tool to assist umpires reach the correct conclusion. At the moment, despite being told by the ICC that it's there to eradicate the howlers, there's far too much emphasis on scrutinising 50/50 decisions. This will probably continue to be the case as long as the right of appeal rests with the players.
I'm not personally in favour of the UDRS but that's immaterial; it's the players and umpires who have to decide the system's method of operation and fate.
However, in conjunction with efforts to fine tune the system, I would also like to hear some parallel discussion on ways to improve the standard of umpiring. And anything that can be done to ensure the best umpires are adjudicating; ie allowing one home umpire to stand would be a step in the right direction.
The crucial decision is finding a way to utilise the system in all matches and if that conclusion can't be reached it should be shelved. That's unlikely to happen.
Expecting the television rights holders to pay for extra technology they don't actually need for their coverage is a sure way to create argument. Equally, asking some of the cash-strapped Boards to foot the bill is unreasonable.
If there was one ruling body they could fund a separate operation to cover the game from an umpire's perspective from the money received for selling the television rights.u00a0
This would then be run separate to the television coverage, which is the only way to ensure the integrity of the system.u00a0
Like a lot of decisions made by cricket administrators the umpire review system wasn't fully thought through before it was implemented. Instead, a problem with umpiring was perceived and when greater use of technology was put forward as a solution it was pounced upon as the way to soothe player and public unrest. So far it's caused as many arguments as it's solved disputes.
A holistic approach to improving the standard of umpiring, including use of a widely accepted UDRS could help the game progress. However, at the moment reaching the right conclusion on the field is impossible while they don't have consensus off the field.
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe today by clicking the link and stay updated with the latest news!" Click here!
