I dont think too many would disagree that Taufel is a good umpire In spite of the mistakes he made in the recent matches, he still remains one of the best. Now, this is what he had to say on the his LBW decision for Tendulkar in the last match: "I always look at the big screen after giving a decision. And the minute I saw the replay of Sachin's dismissal, I knew I got it wrong." Source

I always believed that the field umpire happens to be in the best position to judge LBW and hence technology can not be used effectively. But since an umpire as good as Taufel relies on the replays to ensure that his decision was correct, why can we not make the same replay available to him before making the decision. Taufel said that he regretted the decision the moment he saw the replay. I am sure he would love to minimise such mistakes. So, again, whats wrong in using technology for LBW decisions?

__________________
My computer can beat me at chess.....but its no match for me at kick boxing.

I think the big fear, perhaps understandably, is that using too much technology might make the umpires feel redundant, eventually leading their position becoming less secure than it is now. However, I think such fears are baseless. A traffic camera might catch you speeding or cutting a red light, but you still need human officials to enforce the penalty. In the same way, the umpire should be able to look at the replay of the incident and then make the decision. But at the end of the day, he is making the decision.

One way might be for the umpires on the field to have hand-held small monitors which they can use to check close decisions. It is no different from the present TV replays and third umpires, but by making the on-field official make the decision - albiet with help of technology - the personal involvement will be back. There might be no need of a third umpire then.

If the batsman used the bat instead of the pad the umpire wouldn't have to make a decision... and as I recall, Tendulkar made NO effort to use his bat. Serves him right!

I would, however, support one obvious innovation: allowing challenges as at Wimbledon so long as they are made before the batsman has left the field.

Oh please give it a rest!!

Serves him right?

The decision was absolutely incorrect and that is where any ire, if any, should be directed.

What Sachin chose to do with his pad is irrelevant and saying being incorrectly given out serves him right and thus his fault is just plain wrong.

***

Last ball of the day, Ashley Giles is bowling to you with his depressing negative outside the leg stump line. You choose to kick it away and start tomorrow not out.

He bowls another 12 inches outside leg stump.

He appeals and the umpire gives you out.

"Serves you right" or poor poor decision by umpire?

The main trouble with using replays in any way to decide Lbws is that it isn't only the wickets that they'd have to check. They would have to check every single appeal. We all know that there are usually a large number of Lbw appeals going on (especially with bowlers like Panesar, Warne or Kaneria) - most of which can be rejected straight away. As soon as you bring in the replay, human nature will tend towards the replay being used for every appeal. I've seen this already with run outs, where even obvious 'outs' or 'not outs' are referred to the 3rd umpire these days 'just to make sure'

This would slow play down even more.

I'd be interested to see how the 'Three Appeals' experiment has worked in county cricket; that sounds the obvious direction to go down without slowing play unduly.

I'm not even sure that Taufel got it wrong. The LBW law requires the umpire actually to come to an opinion as to what the onward trajectory of the ball might have been after the moment of impact. It doesn't require a computer to do it - just the umpire. He is allowed to form his opinion based on what he has seen and opinion is beyond challenge. So, in this case, if Taufel thought the man was out, he was out. Taufel had a look at the screen to second guess himself, and decided that, if he had had access to that information, he might have decided differently. However, he did not have access to the screen when he was required to form his opinion; he just formed his opinion on what he had seen. That's what the law requires. I think it's unique with the LBW law, but in this case, if the umpire thinks you're out, you are out.

Now - that doesn't answer the question of whether the umpire should have access to the technology, of course: all I have done here is show that the umpire can't be wrong in a matter of opinion. (He can be wrong in a matter of fact, such as where the ball pitched, of course). But in the end, I'm against replays for these appeals for much the reasons Andy outlines. And I am definitely against appeals against appeals. Finger up - off you go. The umpire makes his decision as a final arbiter - not just as an invitation to discussion. Take it much further and we'll have telephone voting from the crowd: dial 1 if you think the umpire was right, 2 if you think the batsman was right. Too awful to contemplate.

__________________
Money won't buy you friends. But it gets you a better class of enemy.
Spike Milligan

Does it? The ball was missing the off stump and so by the laws of the game that is not out. It is no different from all players kicking away a ball pitching outside the leg stump, knowing that they cannot be given out leg-before. The risk is much greater with the off stump of course, but if a batsman chooses to take that risk and is shown by replays to be correct, how does that "serve him right"?

Sidebottom to Ganguly, first over Day three. When hit in front I thought, that's out. Howell didn't. I was right, Howell was wrong. Do you want that one examined too, and Jaffer and Karthik before lunch on Day Two against Monty?

Yes, Sachin was unlucky but had we used technology all the way through he would have been in against the new-ish ball before lunch on Saturday!

I believe it was scrapped pretty early on, if memory serves correctly - neither the umpires nor captains liked it.

__________________
"Being second is to be the first of the ones who lose."
- Ayrton Senna