Steve Bucknor retires - how would you rate his Umpiring?

[Richard]

I noted in the first thread that it's interesting how utterly polarised opinions of the big Jamaican are. So here's your chance - how would you rate him as an Umpire?

 

[Jigga988]

I noted in the first thread that it's interesting how utterly polarised opinions of the big Jamaican are. So here's your chance - how would you rate him as an Umpire?

Like I said a bit ago, think it would be interesting to see where he would rate out of the current batsmen, for all the people who say he is soooo bad, like to see who they think is better...

 

[_Ed_]

I'll go for moderate overall. He was much better than moderate a few years ago, and a bit below moderate in more recent times.

 

[duffer]

Always thought he was overrated. Not sure where this "he was a great umpire" stuff came from. Just got a lot of cheap love for having a gimmick.

 

[JimmyGS]

I don't think you can get a very polarised opinion if the two most extreme options are "pretty good" and "not so good". "great" and "crap" would've made it interesting.

I would've voted "great" for reference.

 

[silentstriker]

Atrocious is not an option, so I voted not so good.

 

[Uppercut]

Atrocious is not an option, so I voted not so good.

As has every India fan, I note.

 

[silentstriker]

As has every India fan, I note.

Yeah. Indian fans have been quite familiar with him, way before Sydney last year.

 

[SpaceMonkey]

Started to lose it as he got older but easier the best Umpire in the world in his hayday.

 

[Precambrian]

(Making up for the irrelevant option)

 

[Goughy]

Not read the other posts in here but I thought he was always ordinary and rapidly declined form there.

In his favor was that he could do a decent job and was willing to travel and be part of the elite panel when others didnt want to be.

 

[Something_Fishy]

Some good, some bad.

 

[Evermind]

Where is the option for "I could do better blindfolded, with earplugs, high on meth"?

 

[haroon510]

indian fans will vote not good ..although, i might be late to say that by now.. lol

i think he was pretty good at the start of his career.. specaily around 98 to 02.. but he kind of lost it in the middle..i voted very good though .. campring to some umpires such as ashaka de silva, Mr. hair, Mr. Harper and afew others that we have seen in recent time.. add current Sri Lanka Vs. Pakistan Umpire (steve davis) to that list as well..he was much better.. he had his bad days.. (sydne Test) but overall he was pretty good i think..

 

[pup11]

Look, he was an extremely good umpire for a good chunk of his career, but over the last few years his decision making graph has constantly shown a drop in accuracy, he also got involved in a few controversies, I think he should have retired after the WC final, but he instead dragged on his career for a bit too long, and to an extent, that's has dented all the good work he did prior to that.

Despite all that had a pretty decent career, but overall when you sum it up, it was just about a moderate umpiring career.

 

[G.I.Joe]

Should've stuck to football. Ego has no place in umpiring.

 

[Richard]

I don't think you can get a very polarised opinion if the two most extreme options are "pretty good" and "not so good". "great" and "crap" would've made it interesting.

I would've voted "great" for reference.

There is absolutely no way he was "crap", and the simple reality is that it's almost impossible to be really good as an Umpire - even the very best make mistakes not-irregularly, and most of the pretty decent ones make them far too often to be acceptable, IMO.

The only Umpires I've ever seen who would fit "a great Umpire" are Dickie Bird and, so far, Simon Taufel. And I've been watching (seriously) for 11 years now.

 

[silentstriker]

There is absolutely no way he was "crap"

He was for the last few years IMO.

 

[Richard]

That's not the question I'm asking. He's been diabolical for the last year-and-a-bit; he was also poor between 2002/03 and 2004/05. However, the question I'm asking is how did he compare to others over his career.

 

[silentstriker]

That's not the question I'm asking. He's been diabolical for the last year-and-a-bit; he was also poor between 2002/03 and 2004/05. However, the question I'm asking is how did he compare to others over his career.

I know what you are saying, but in my opinion, he has irrevocably downgraded his status in my eyes due to his last couple years. When you don't have faith in an umpire's ability to give a fair result, I don't think you can drop any lower as an umpire. IMO of course, as evidenced by the poll - a larger percentage of people disagree with that statement.