THE EDITOR, Sir:HOW LONG must this go on? Another Test match blighted by a few crucial umpiring errors. Although the ICC has refused to generalise the use of video technology to resolve close decisions, the reality is that the TV networks ensure that the technology is in daily use. In effect, everybody has it although the umpires have it only after the decision has been made.
UNFORTUNATE
In my view, this is an unfortunate and unnecessary state of affairs and it is good to see someone of Clive Lloyd's stature adding his voice to the call for it. The ICC's panel of elite umpires was a reasonable move in its time, but it is no longer sufficient. Umpires are humans too, and make mistakes. Will the players and spectators believe that a particular decision was an honest mistake? They might, but even honest mistakes can alter the course of a match, and open the umpire up to all kinds of uncharitable characterisations.
LBW decisions and those thin edges taken by the wicketkeeper are the thorniest. They constitute a large proportion of all dismissals and a very high percentage of the controversial ones. Because there is often a very thin line between 'out' and 'not out' with these two, it is almost cruel to require umpiring infallibility based on one split-second sighting while everyone can immediately or later produce incontrovertible evidence of its correctness or otherwise.
This is exactly what we are requiring when they are denied access to frame by frame replays of the incident until after the decision has been made.
UMPIRING DECISIONS
The quality of umpiring decisions can be improved by video technology and the ICC should review its position on the issue. It might otherwise find itself trying to defend the exclusion of an innovation that can measurably lift the standard of the game.
I am, etc.,
MICHAEL NICHOLSON
Kingston 6
