Quality of Umpiring

[TPL288]

How shocking was the LBW decision on Katich? Has anyone noticed how crap an umpire Dar is and how many LBWs he has given the 4th Test. Bring back Billy Bowden or Dickie Bird!

How come umpires don't get disciplined like the players for making the wrong decisions? They should be suspended for a game or two if they make bad decisions. It happens in Rugby, Rugby League, Basketball etc...

[Rob.]

Aleem Dar is a fine umpire, one of the very best on the circuit.

I do wish you Aussies would stop being sour grapes and admit that England are outplaying you and beating you fair and square, you keep looking for excuses all the time and it grates. Every team has been a victime of bad umpiring decisions (plenty of sides that have played against Australia I must add), it is just apart of the game and makes it more interesting. Please stop feeling sorry for yourselves.

[Aussie-Yank]

Wow, you must of read alot into the statement about the poor umpiring. Because I did not read any where where it said that if the bad umpiring decisions did not happen Australia would not have lost.

It actually stated, which is fact, that the decision was wrong and a bad call. When refs in other sports make wrong decisions like that they are demoted for one to two games as a penalty, but this does not happen in cricket.

So you did not even answer the question.

[Rob.]

I have been reading some Aussie forums and that is the overall impression I have got from a lot of Australians.

My answer to the question is no. You can't get punished for human error and we don't have enough umpires to make up for bans and what not. We don't need to be putting any extra pressure on our umpires anyway.

[Aussie-Yank]

Just because you read others does not mean they are saying the same thing. But I agree that bad umpiring decisions should have some type of penalty attached to it. The missing out of the next international match and they have to go back to there country umpiring.

Having no penaty makes it an easy cop out for the umpire.

[Moss]

Yes, there were some bad umpiring decisions, but I believe Aleem Dar to be up there with Simon Taufel as one of the best in the world.

No umpire has ever got it 100% right - they are human.
Name me a person who hasn't put a foot wrong this series, be they umpire or player.

There is no one.

Calls go both ways, with luck evening out. Aus have had a few good calls too.

Umpiring in cricket is a hugely more demanding job than any other sport, simply because of the complexities of the rules, various methods of getting out etc.
The simple fact that a game of football lasts 90 minutes, a game of rugby 80, and a game of cricket probably lasts around 1800 minutes means that concentration has to be paramount.

Umpires are normally very good, making accurate decisions. Occasionally they get a stinker - that's the nature of the game.

I would still be saying this had Flintoff got a crap decision.

Let's face it, the game wasn't won or lost on that one decision either.

Answering the question, they shouldn't be fined. What good would it do?
Why would the knowledge of having a few hundred quid taken off you improve your umpiring?

Knowing he could be fined for dissent didn't stop Ponting addressing the English dressing room as ******* cheats did it?

[Rob.]

Very, very good point Moss.

[Rachael]

What whas been devastating about the poor decisions in this series has not been how bad they have been (they've not been shocking) but how they've had such a critical influence on the matches: Katich at Trent Bridge was clearly in this category.. but the biggest was surely Martyn's earlier in the series - he was looking very, very dangerous at the time!

Some decisions barely matter.. but those two certainly did!

[Andy Mellon]

Originally Posted by Aussie-Yank

Having no penaty makes it an easy cop out for the umpire.

When the people who have the benefit of seeing these slowed down replays can come anywhere near as close to making the correct decision as some of these umpires, then feel free to have a go at them. Katich's wicket was a 3 or 4 inches outside the leg stump. Yes, Dar got it wrong, but he sees one view and has to make a decision. I'm sure in his mind's eye, the ball hit Katich on Leg Stump. ******, if some of the Lbws I've seen in club cricket were made at test level then you'd have something to complain about.

Another example - Ponting's lbw in the first innings. It took Channel 4 about an hour to prove that Ponting had hit it.

If umpires are to be 'banned' for a game for making the wrong decision, how many games ban do Ponting and Katich's reactions deserve? Umpires are assessed on a longer period, and rightly so, continual poor decision will see them removed from the elite panel. One poor decision does not and should not see them removed. If you suspended an umpire for a game for a poor decision, when would that ban apply. Would Ponting's first innings lbw decision warrant a ban? Absolutely rubbish idea. Both teams have the same two neutral umpires for test matches - I don't see what else can be done.

I am absolutely fed up with umpires copping the blame for a team's failure. I've said this before when England have suffered and I'll continue to say it. Until you send every decision to the 3rd umpire and do away with the field umpires, the current situation is the best situation. When technology takes over, I think it'll be a sad day - and Ponting would still have been out in the 1st innings - unless you suggest they should take an hour over each decision.

[Andy Mellon]

Originally Posted by Rachael

Some decisions barely matter.. but those two certainly did!

I don't agree with that either. Even if you get sawn off first ball, or when you've not been playing well, that doesn't mean you wouldn't have ground it out and succeeded in the end. Conversely, just because a player has been sawn off, and whatever form he was in, doesn't mean that he wouldn't have been out next ball!! This is just another 'if'