Thursday, July 31, 2008

I Don't Care For The Umps

I do not watch cricket for the human errors that these umpires make. I do not see any romance or beauty in them. In fact its ugly and spoils the game for me. It will not be a great loss to cricket if these Umps become mere coat hangers. They do not bring any charm at all to the game. Its utter nonsense to think of incompetent umpires as a virtue. I find people who think so to be stupid, slow and very retarded.

The players make the game charming. Umps mostly come in the way of the players from charming us. If it takes TV and referral system to stop the Umps from coming in the way then by all means the system should go for it.


Anonymous said...

May be have tiny robots around the stumps to do the umpiring! Precision equipments. Better than some umpires who make stupid decisions like Venkatraghavan and his Thalai sorinjufying act!

amanchap said...

May be one of the cheer leaders should replace the Umpires :D

chokkathangam said...

i wholeheartedly agree that umpires do not add anything to the game. only, i also think that cricket itself is not an attractive sport, both for participants and viewers. its not like i greatly enjoy other sports, but cricket and any american sport ('cept basketball)i simply do not find interesting.

Chetan said...

This was a column written by George Will on similar calls to replace umpires in Baseball. I think it applies to cricket too.

It is not news that to err is human, and so are umpires. Now, however, those ancient truths coexist with a new fact: Seemingly everything is visually recorded. After all, everyone has a camera in the phone in his or her pocket. So we can do something-- can't we? -- about imperfection. That which can be measured can be perfected, can't it? And extremism in pursuit of perfection is no vice, is it?


The problem is that reformers will not restrain their metabolic urge for perfection. Listen, as they seem not to, to the logic of their language. They say: If you can replay something, you can get it right -- judge it infallibly -- and that is all that matters. This is an argument for using replays on every close call -- plays at the bases and home plate, hit batters. And: Did an outfielder catch or trap a sinking line drive, etc.?

But it is not true that cameras positioned around a ballpark can answer every question, or even be more definitive than are baseball's remarkably skilled umpires, who render judgments close to a play. And even if cameras could deliver certainty, it is foolish to think that all other values should be sacrificed to that one.

I think your own post about how the visual about Ponting (not) grounding the ball captured by cameras serves as a warning. Technology can and does provide an incomplete picture to audiences who in turn go all jingoistic and self-righteous. I think I am better of with them feeling bitter about wrong decisions and blaming the umpires' biases than feeling all self-righteous and smug that they know the decision was wrong based on some photograph they saw on the internet vis a vis the decision made on the basis of some sophisticated software like Hawkeye.