Favourite Umpire

[The Great DonTalon]

in my opinion stephen Bucknor is still the best and most consistent umpire in the word...he is not the most well liked by fans but he's certainly consistent and well respected but the ICC and other umpires. At the risk of sounding bad here i will say that the subcontinent umpires have in large part been all terrible..either making bad decisions too often or jumping at the slightest noise of an appeal especially appeals made by the top teams. They also seemingly never are for the smaller teams more prone to send their batsmen walking that they would for the more established teams.

I wont be biased here though some of the other umps have been equally as bad.

[imaginarydiva]

Righty and i think he really deserved it.Hes done a pretty good job in the subcontinent at a time when people are talking abt noisy crowds and weird pitches.But hey;how then do u differentiate between a layman and an umpire?

[King Aragorn]

This might be straight from the heart of a passionate Pakistani...but I think that Aleem Dar is a great umpire judging from whatever tiny number of matches he has refereed and most probably will keep improving as he gains further experience. Even greats like Ian Botham and Michael holding praised him for some of his performances.

And he seemed to be a very strong willed man. In Australia, he viewed Warne's 'wide' balls as a negative tactic and promptly signalled one as a wide ('Officially'). It certainly shows that when he notices something on the field, he is quick to made sound judgements and clearly point to the problem rather than avoid it or be 'intimidated' by the players.

Now something regarding Shepherd - Hopefully I am not deviating from the topic too far. Some Pakistani fans do accuse him to being biased and in fact I myself couldn't resist the temptation once (), but it is very rare. Some fans are just too emotional and look at only one side of the picture. Umpires make mistakes - after all they are human beings! "To err is human"! And as more and more technology is being used, their errors are being exposed further.

But I personally feel that it is time that the ICC took a decision to dismiss the 'old guard' and bring in new, younger umpires. Shepherd is nearly 64 years old! Fans need to accept umpiring mistakes because they as humans make mistakes - but the ICC needs to understand that umpires age and that their senses and reflexes lose their sharpness! Hence a needs to be achieved between the two. Shepherd WAS a great umpire but he a mere shadow of his past self now...the ICC need to take some concrete steps to make sure that the umpiring standards keep increasing.

[Occasional Fan]

King Aragorn - welcome to the board.

You might be interested in these threads (there are others on these subjects as well: use the search facility to find them).

On technology: Umpires - is 92% enough? Link here.

On David Shepherd: Link here.

[Maranello]

On the retirement point, couldn't agree with you more KA.

It seems a lot of people have a soft spot for Shepherd because he is round and cuddly and reminds them of Santa Claus with his red face. But really, international cricket should not be made hostage to sentimental twaddle. The ICC should institute regular screenings, reviews and check-ups for every umpire on its Elite Panel, and those who do not meet the minimum fitness, or eye-sight standards should politely be requested to retire.

Many English fans and administrators have a parochial attitude to this, since Shepherd is "one of their own". But this is another instance where the ICC should take the lead and is failing to do so. We discussed Aleem Dar (and retirement ages for umpires) in this thread a short while ago.

[Maranello]

OF it was the Aleem Dar thread I have already linked to above in post #27137.

I did read the David Shepherd thread many weeks ago, and was shocked at some of the anti-Pakistan comments in there; as those were by a minority of the members here, and were in the sanctuary of their own forum, I deem it wise not to comment on what is essentially an old argument (ie The Sun/Mail/Star argument, which goes something along the lines of: "Are Pakis cheats?").

[Richie Benauds Love Child]

I thought he older than 64 to be honest. No offence to the old chap or other old umps but its not really an old blokes occupation anymore. Look at referees in football. Gone are the days of some old boy shuffleing from one end of the centre circle to the next. With the exception of Collina (the greatest ever) most arent a great deal older than the players because they have to keep up with play and its so much quicker than it was 20 years ago.

Slightly different reasons for cricket, principally because technology is better so any **** ups can be spotted.

[King Aragorn]

Originally Posted by Occasional Fan

King Aragorn - welcome to the board.

You might be interested in these threads (there are others on these subjects as well: use the search facility to find them).

On technology: Umpires - is 92% enough? Link here.

On David Shepherd: Link here.

Originally Posted by Maranello

We discussed Aleem Dar (and retirement ages for umpires) in this thread a short while ago.

Thank you OF and Maranello bhai!

[Occasional Fan]

Originally Posted by Maranello

I did read the David Shepherd thread many weeks ago, and was shocked at some of the anti-Pakistan comments in there; as those were by a minority of the members here, and were in the sanctuary of their own forum, I deem it wise not to comment on what is essentially an old argument (ie The Sun/Mail/Star argument, which goes something along the lines of: "Are Pakis cheats?").

I remember starting that thread in response to a report that Shepherd had been removed from the panel to umpire Pakistan's games at the ICCCT, and at Pakistan's request. That wasn't intended in any way to suggest that Pakistan were cheating, but it was intended to raise questions about the method of selecting umpires. It would be a shame if it degenerated to the sort of allegation you are suggesting - but I confess I haven't re-read it before putting the link above. If you think, Maranello, that it is better left in the dark and historic corners of the board, by all means don your moderator's hat and take the link out of the above post.

[Maranello]

I understand OF, I wasn't referring to your thread or the sentiments behind that, which I can perfectly empathise with. The posts I was not happy about are #17536 and #17542.

Personally, I don't mind the link in your post above, everyone is mature and sensible here, and is free to reach their own conclusions. I am probably with you in that I feel strong about censorship. And moving issues under the carpet or to the dark recesses of the board so that they are not read/noticed smacks of censorship to me!