Indian Management to File Complaint Against Aleem Dar

[silentstriker]

The motive is irrelevent. If a side feels that the umpiring was not up to international standard, then they should complain. It's that simple. There is a reason such channels exist and without anyone complaining, it can't get better.

 

[Sanz]

I have no problem with them complaining but they could have done it without making a fuss about it in the public and I do agree that this sounds a bit like sour grapes.

Disspointing.

 

[pasag]

This is by no means a criticism of their move here and I don't want to open a can of worms here either, but I can't help but see the irony of getting rid of a top umpire like Hair (strictly decision making wise obv) and then complaining about this. Again, as has been said they have every right to (both vote against Hair and complain here), but I don't feel much sympathy for them at the same time, on this issue.

 

[Nishant]

I agree that india should lodge a complaint...but not on Aleem Dar but on the umpiring as a whole. Its harsh to blame Dar when IMHO...it wasnt just him who has had a poor series. Bad decisions have been made....but India are gonna complain abt one umpire only, that plain wrong.

 

[Nishant]

I have no problem with them complaining but they could have done it without making a fuss about it in the public and I do agree that this sounds a bit like sour grapes.
Disspointing.

Blaming and complaining about only Aleem Dar and not umpiring throughout the tour as a whole does suggest that TBH...poor form IMO

 

[honestbharani]

This is by no means a criticism of their move here and I don't want to open a can of worms here either, but I can't help but see the irony of getting rid of a top umpire like Hair (strictly decision making wise obv) and then complaining about this. Again, as has been said they have every right to (both vote against Hair and complain here), but I don't feel much sympathy for them at the same time, on this issue.

well, Hair made his position untenable vis-a-vis Sri Lanka and Pakistan and India basically had to back them there because it was obvious that he wasn't handling the other two Asian teams well and also because they had a problem trusting him and his calls... Don't really wat is the point you were making, really... Just because you get rid of an umpire who seems to have a bit of an attitude problem even though he was very good decisions-wise, you should NOT complain about bad decision making from another umpire?


Let me see, Pakistan take out Shoaib Akhtar from their team for bad behaviour and then let's say they complain about Mohammed Sami's wayward bowling, you would say that you won't feel much sympathy for them?

 

[pasag]

well, Hair made his position untenable vis-a-vis Sri Lanka and Pakistan and India basically had to back them there because it was obvious that he wasn't handling the other two Asian teams well and also because they had a problem trusting him and his calls... Don't really wat is the point you were making, really... Just because you get rid of an umpire who seems to have a bit of an attitude problem even though he was very good decisions-wise, you should NOT complain about bad decision making from another umpire?

Let me see, Pakistan take out Shoaib Akhtar from their team for bad behaviour and then let's say they complain about Mohammed Sami's wayward bowling, you would say that you won't feel much sympathy for them?

As I said, they had every right to make the complaint here and vote off Hair if you re-read my post, I was merely pointing to how I find the situation ironic.

 

[honestbharani]

I have no problem with them complaining but they could have done it without making a fuss about it in the public and I do agree that this sounds a bit like sour grapes.

Disspointing.

I think they were asked about all this, tbh. It is not like Shukla came out telling everyone that "we are gonna complain abt the umpires"...

And reading that article, I don't see them saying that they are only complaining about Dar here. That is how the article paints it, I agree but it won't be the first time media have sewn up a story from something else... And as far as I can recall, I think the procedure is that ICC gives both captains a feedback form kind of thing about the umpires at the end of each and every series, so I think it will be about the whole series and not just the one match.


I do agree that if it was just about the one match, then it is a bit disappointing, even though I would again refrain from using the word "sour grapes". They may well feel that it was the biggest howler of them all, the way Dar did in the last game and perhaps they may think that they are the ones they ought to complain about. AT the end of the day, they are only doing something through the proper channels and we should just leave it at that. Guessing motives will take us nowhere as we will just end up arguing in circles.

 

[honestbharani]

As I said, they had every right to make the complaint and vote off Hair if you re-read my post, I was merely pointing to how I find the situation ironic.

that, I agree... But the fact is that some of these howlers have been from guys who were rated to be amongst the very best of the existing umpires, in fact, Taufel was above Hair even when Hair was a regular umpire... So, not really sure about the irony, even.

But I get your point now. Sorry that I misinterpreted what you said previously.

 

[Nishant]

I think they were asked about all this, tbh. It is not like Shukla came out telling everyone that "we are gonna complain abt the umpires"...

And reading that article, I don't see them saying that they are only complaining about Dar here. That is how the article paints it, I agree but it won't be the first time media have sewn up a story from something else... And as far as I can recall, I think the procedure is that ICC gives both captains a feedback form kind of thing about the umpires at the end of each and every series, so I think it will be about the whole series and not just the one match.


I do agree that if it was just about the one match, then it is a bit disappointing, even though I would again refrain from using the word "sour grapes". They may well feel that it was the biggest howler of them all, the way Dar did in the last game and perhaps they may think that they are the ones they ought to complain about. AT the end of the day, they are only doing something through the proper channels and we should just leave it at that. Guessing motives will take us nowhere as we will just end up arguing in circles.

Unfortunately, thats all we can do ATM TBH...its not be can trust the media all that well...just take the Tendulkar retirement saga of late. It would make sense if Indian management were gonna complain abt umpiring as a whole...in which case i would fully support the complaint/feedback and would hope that something is done about it.

 

[Engle]

I'd be interested in finding out what good will come of this complaint. Snicks are the hardest decision an ump has to make.

 

[Nishant]

I'd be interested in finding out what good will come of this complaint. Snicks are the hardest decision an ump has to make.

Hopefully the players will be allowed to make at least a few referrels(sp).

 

[silentstriker]

I'd be interested in finding out what good will come of this complaint. Snicks are the hardest decision an ump has to make.

Hopefully referrals. Or better umpires. Preferably both.

 

[BoyBrumby]

Tendulkar has been very lucky, has anybody kept an account of how many dodgy decisions he has had in both the Test and ODI series?

I can think of three off the top of my head:

- He got a real smeller padding up to a ball from Collingwood in the 2nd test that looked like it would've missed off by six inches; dire leave but that doesn't justify the decision. Taufel the ump.

- He had a swish at a short one from Fred in the 2nd ODI and missed by a bit (caught his arm guard from memory) but was given out. On 99...

-This last one which, for mine, wasn't in the same league as the first two. It was wrong, yes, but one has sympathy with Dar. It looked right & the bat flicking the pad probably made it a v hard decision.

I have no problem with them complaining but they could have done it without making a fuss about it in the public and I do agree that this sounds a bit like sour grapes.

Disspointing.

I'd agree with that. I imagine all teams give reports on umpire's performances anyway, which is only as it should be. Just seems unfortunate that this has entered the public domain. Whether it was mischief making by the media or if Shukla was just having a whinge I don't think it serves any purpose. Dar's one of the best about for me &, moreover, snicko seemed to support him on Dravid's dismissal anyway.

 

[Turbinator]

Hopefully referrals. Or better umpires. Preferably both.

Yeah I was against this referral system not too long ago, but now I feel it really will make the game better and more fair. But really if the umpire is unsure why can't he just ask the damn 3rd umpire to confirm, like Holding said during the games. Really it'll just make the game better, if we have the technology to confirm things like this, we should use it.

 

[SpaceMonkey]

The referral system was used in the UK this year and was a complete disaster.

 

[silentstriker]

The referral system was used in the UK this year and was a complete disaster.

Doesn't necessarily mean there is anything wrong with the system, maybe just the implementation.

I know it was used, what were the problems?

 

[BoyBrumby]

Doesn't necessarily mean there is anything wrong with the system, maybe just the implementation.

I know it was used, what were the problems?

Two main issues that I could see with it: firstly that the wording of the referrals was weighted in favour of the umpires (i.e. decisions were referred to the third umpire for him to say beyond reasonable doubt that a decision was wrong) so very few decision were actually overturned; and secondly that he referrals had to be instantaneous, which presented a problem for the batting side unless the captain happened to be batting. In one match shown live on Sky over here a batsman was given out LBW to a ball that pitched well outside leg (may've been Mustard of Durham, but couldn't swear to that) & trudged off. Halfway back to the pavilion his skipper told him to appeal (presumably having seen the live feed), but he was unable to do so as the appeal hadn't been immediate.

As you observe tho these are questions regarding its implementation rather than the idea per se. I would say tho that with the burden of proof being with the appellant it does seem to suggest that the umpiring fraternity are less than fulsome in their embrace of the idea; possibly seeing it as further erosion of their powers. They may have a point.

I personally would like to see an extention of umpires' power of referral. I don't see any problem with referring nicks behind or questions on where a ball has pitched to the third ump. The ICC regularly boast that umpires get well over 90% of decisions correct, but how is this measured? By referring to technology one assumes; so if it's there & can improve that percentage why not use it?

 

[silentstriker]

As you observe tho these are questions regarding its implementation rather than the idea per se. I would say tho that with the burden of proof being with the appellant it does seem to suggest that the umpiring fraternity are less than fulsome in their embrace of the idea; possibly seeing it as further erosion of their powers. They may have a point.

No, that's how it should be. The burden of proof always lies with the appellant. Same thing in the NFL where the replay has been used for 15 years. Unless the referee sees incontrovertible evidence to the contrary, the call on the field stands. Most of the calls stand because you cannot prove 100% that the umpire was wrong. And that's a good thing, as it will get rid of the obvious errors such as ball pitching outside leg, but it won't be that people are arguing about an overturned call being wrong.

And IMO, you should be able to refer until the next ball is bowled.

 

[HeathDavisSpeed]

I think its awful that Dar is being criticised for the last ODI. The two marginal decisions (Tendulkar & Dravid) were hardly obvious errors. My immediate thought at the time was that Dravid wasn't out and that Tendulkar was (how wrong was I). Judging by the combination of the noise (a very woody bat on pad noise) and the time the ball passed the bat for the Tendulkar dismissal made that one incredibly tough to call. I wager that any umpire would have had difficulty with that one. The Dravid one didn't sound like bat to me, but the technology later showed that it probably was. Two incredibly tough decisions to make, and a 50:50 success rate? Also, in both cases, it took technology at least a couple of overs to 'prove' that it was not out / out; are people seriously advocating a referral for every time that the ball flies past the outside edge. Forget slow over rates of 12/13 overs per hour, you'll be lucky to fit in five!

The other problem I have with the use of technology in edges behind is that the benefit of the doubt is bound to go to the batsman. The technology showed that it was likely that Dravid edged behind. Guaranteed that the Dravid dismissal would have been given not out on the balance of probabilities. We need to be evening out the ever widening gulf between the batsman and bowler, not making it easier for the batsman. If you just want to see big beefy guys belting the crap off the ball, just let Derek Pringle play test match cricket again.

I'm pretty fed up of people lynching umpires with words when the decisions are damn close. By all means, chastise them and complain until you're blue in the face when they make an absolute howler (e.g. the ball pitches a foot outside leg stump, but an lbw is given) but you cannot damn an otherwise good umpire on the basis of a 50:50 decision.

Also, why are people largely ignoring the fact that Uthappa was given not out off (a very thin edge). To my mind, that makes the (marginally) wrong decisions in that last ODI 1-all. From what I've read in the media, you'd think Aleem Dar was wagering a one-man campaign to dismiss the Indian batsmen for no reason at all!