Referential Integrity

The umpire referral system has come under quite a bit of justifiable criticism. The two Test matches currently under way have been full of referral incidents – very few of which have showed the system in a good light. The players in interview seem to dislike the system and some commentators have called for it to be stopped. Personally I think the system in some form must stay. We need a system that will reverse obvious miscarriages: the LBW that pitches outside leg-stump, the LBW that has a big snick into the pad, the caught behind that clearly misses the bat or the bat-pad that misses the bat by some distance. How do we get from where we are now to a system that people are happy with?

Firstly a few observations about the current system:

• A batsman never thinks he is out. Batting is a difficult profession made more difficult by the fact that the innings can end on any delivery. Batsmen will try anything to avoid getting out, including using a referral when they are clearly out – as Pietersen showed on Friday.
• A bowler always thinks it is out. Graeme Smith’s first ball in the second innings was clearly not LBW. It hit him outside off stump and moved away – and yet Australia insisted on a referral. In Ryan Sidebottom’s first over today (Sunday) to Sarwan he appealed to a ball that clearly pitched outside leg stump. It was, of course, turned down so they asked for a referral. Same result.
• Darryl Harper is a poor third umpire. He gave Chanderpaul out on replay when it was fairly clear on all replays that it way too high. He also turned over the not-out decision in favour of Brendan Nash when there was no good reason to.
• The current system is not very well implemented because no one seems to know what is going on. There is scope for keeping the crowd informed (novel idea I know) and creating some drama. At present a referral seems to take an age with no one having a clue what is happening.

Some have suggested that it is the umpire that should instigate a referral at his discretion. While I think umpires should be able to refer to the third umpire there is a flaw in this as a general principle: if the umpire thinks it is out when an LBW pitches outside leg-stump then, as he has already made the mistake and he is not going to refer it. Umpires always want to make the correct judgement; if they think the decision is correct – they are not going to ask someone else.

A few recommendations:

1. Let the on-field umpires talk to the third umpire about anything – it’s ridiculous to prevent them from talking freely. There are rules about what the on-field umpire can or cannot ask the third umpire -- how daft is that?
   
2. Allow the third umpire to use any and all technology available. The fact that the third umpire cannot see a Hawkeye track – but I can see it - is silly. Umpires can be told to take the prediction with caution.
3. Give the third umpire lots of training. Umpires are used to making decisions on-field. Sitting in a room full of TV monitors is a different situation and umpires should receive lots of training in the differences – I am guessing they do not (from the mistakes they make)
4. Enshrine the principle that ‘The on-field umpires make the decision and they can only be over-ruled when a clear mistake has been made’. This has been followed ad-hoc.

Any other suggestions?