I agree about the use of technology, but how can the decision against Symonds be considered "Marginal"? The nick was very loud and a top level umpire should have picked it up. It was/is "The Turning Point" in the match. Symonds was only on about 30 at that stage and Australia would have struggled to reach 250 if he had been given out.

The decisions against Ponting - one which gave him not out (when Australia had lost 2 early wickets would have put more pressure on the Australian batsmen to come) and the other one which gave him out were also poor decision.

The error in case of Symonds is extremely significant because it has changed the course of the match and possibly has decided the series. The Indians were fighting hard after the MCG debacle and were on course to get Australia out cheaply.

The problem we are facing here is that umpires are human while technology is not. For a start, I do not believe that any single international umpire in the current books - irrespective of his nationality - shows the least degree of favouritism or otherwise to any country - in other words, I think they are all honest and try to do a difficult job that is now approaching levels of impossibility. Even relatively young umpires like Simon Taufel and Aleem Dhar occasionally miss out - we know that now because of technology. Umpires from the bygone days like Frank Chester (once considered the best of all) were really no better except that the onlookers in those days did not have the benefit of things like Ultra slo-mo replays, Hawkeyes, Snikometres or that infra-red thingy. But we now do and it is too late to go back and stop all that.

Therefore, umpires' mistakes do get picked-up every time now and depending upon how a wrong decision affects the outcome of the game, people will speculate to no end. It will only get worse and could even lead people to start casting doubts on the officials' integrity. IMO, the only way to overcome that problem is to introduce available technology to all possible aspects of the game. Right now, the situation is silly; slo-mo replays are repeatedly used to check run-out situations, but hawkeye is not allowed in lbws. An umpire is allowed to check if a fielder took a catch cleanly, but has to make up his own mind if the ball brushed the bat or glove.

Introduction of technology might seem to make the umpires redundant - it might to some extent. But there is still a lot for the official to do out there - checking that players don't trod on the wicket, keeping tabs on behaviour etc. And they still would give the ultimate decision, except that it will be after checking with the techies first.

I see nothing wrong in that and it is bound to happen sooner or later if decisions like that of Symonds' today affect the outcome of a game.

I agree Nostromo. Let's hope it's sooner rather than later.

__________________
A lie can travel halfway around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes
Mark Twain

Oh well we had one shocking decision for each side and there is no reason to think that Ponting wouldn't have got the big ton Symonds did after his reprieve so neither side can complain about the umpiring.

Australia on top after day 1 and India need to show some spirit when they bat.

Ponting was out even before he had reached 35, but was given not out.. so the argument that he may have scored a century is not applicable. Whereas in Symonds case, he is still there putting Australia ahead by at least 150 runs at this stage (who knows how many more runs he will score on day 2).

Very valid argument and I support it. But for the time being India are practically in a hopeless situation because of umpiring errors. A test match which could have been a good contest has been virtually made one-sided by an umpire who should have retired long time ago.

But even with technology incidents where catches have been claimed are hardly ever clear cut and umpires then have to waste more time looking at video evidence which IMO is flawed anyway. I'd not bring in any other tech (maybe reduce it) and ban all replay screens from the ground which would reduce pressure on umpires as well.

__________________
Nothing says "Obey Me" like a bloody head on a fence post!

RBLC the pressure on umpires doesn't come from the replay screens alone; most of it is from the television audience of millions. Should we ban replays and slow-motion footage on TV too? What about YouTube and the internet? A ban there too, perhaps? Hmmm.

Video evidence is "not" flawed as you say; only in some cases (bump catches being the main example), it is inconclusive. In those areas, I am happy for technology not to be used, and for teams to do what the likes of Ponting, Lara and Inzi long suggested and used as captains: reliance on the word of the fielder, something that Michael Vaughan as captain was completely against.

However, most controversial umpiring decisions do not involve bump catches - for those, technology would be an invaluable to ensure that the umpire has the benefit of the same technology that's available to millions all over the world and so can make a better call - not a call that's correct all the time, but definitely one that is much more accurate and reliable.

__________________
A lie can travel halfway around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes
Mark Twain

No, that would be stupid, and really I was citing bump catches only as video evidence that was flawed (but even then the snick-o-metre is very very marginal, but that wasnt the core of my argument.

I might swear at the tv/radio quite loudly but the umpire cant hear me. If I and thousands of others grown (or worse) at a 40ft square screen- he will. And whats more he'll KNOW he got it wrong. Will he put it to the back of his mind ? Will he try and "even it up" ? Now unless he brings in his own TV /laptop onto the square he wont know until after the match.

Technolgy is useful for TV chaps to bleat on about ad infinitum but for anumpire, certainly with the mistakes highlighted for all the world (andyou)to see it must be a pain in the ****. I guess for runouts etc its still OK but for everything else I still have reservations.

And thank heavens they have taken away the "appeals committee" type thing they had in the county game and it didnt reach test level, you'd have quicker bowlers running in off two paces just to get the overs in..........

__________________
Nothing says "Obey Me" like a bloody head on a fence post!