Appealing decisions?

[The Baconator]

The ICC is thinking of allowing players to appeal 3 LBW decisons in an innings to be referred to a 3rd umpire. If they do it it seems like a good idea but probably won't work. THey'll most likely try it out in the next champions trophy if they decide to do it

 

[luckyeddie]

The ICC is thinking of allowing players to appeal 3 LBW decisons in an innings to be referred to a 3rd umpire. If they do it it seems like a good idea but probably won't work. THey'll most likely try it out in the next champions trophy if they decide to do it

It'll go the same way as the white lines down the middle of the pitch.

Who does the appealing, by the way?

Can the batsman appeal and say 'I don't think I was out'?

 

[Linda]

Devalues the umpires decision, making it a bad choice in my opinion.
LBWs I've seen on replay are frequently inconclusive, and no doubt if they start there they'll continue on to catches, which would be even worse!
Run-outs and stumpings only, as far as Im concerned.

 

[Mr Casson]

They're effectively creating a situation where a player can have more say in a decision than the on-field umpire, and that is really not the way it should be.

 

[honestbharani]

This is being initiated with all good intentions but as with other rules, its success relies heavily upon those who implement it. The captains and the players should only appeal when they really feel the decision was wrong. Otherwise, it would just become a drag.

 

[Jono]

They're effectively creating a situation where a player can have more say in a decision than the on-field umpire, and that is really not the way it should be.

Exactly! There's no authority, it's completely diminishing the idea of an umpire.

 

[sledger]

Exactly! There's no authority, it's completely diminishing the idea of an umpire.

i could'nt agree more.

i think this appealin an umpires decion is ridiculous. if this becomes a legal opportunity then the on foield umpires may as well be scrapped completely and just use the match referee and a tv umpire as they do in rugby.

i think this is a terrible idea and will bring the game into disrepute and cause a whole load of controversial incidents destroying the nature of the game.

 

[aussie_beater]

This is completely mindless.If this were implemented then it will destroy the game of cricket as we know it. There maybe errors on the part of umpires but to make the umpire a completely toothless creature is going to destroy the game. If umpires commit mistakes, the concerned parties can voice their opinions after the game as it is today and the ICC may choose to look into the issues as feedback on the umpires and do the proper quality assurances on the umpires it nominates. But that should be all.

 

[Langeveldt]

They should all go and play Ultimate Frisbee.. Therefore diminishing the need for an umpire in the first place..

 

[luckyeddie]

They should all go and play Ultimate Frisbee.. Therefore diminishing the need for an umpire in the first place..

<quack>

Second only to LAWN DARTS

 

[Richard]

It would be so much easier if Umpires could just have a word in the ear... and if "did he hit it" could be referred. WITH use of Snickos.

 

[telsor]

The ICC is thinking of allowing players to appeal 3 LBW decisons in an innings to be referred to a 3rd umpire. If they do it it seems like a good idea but probably won't work. THey'll most likely try it out in the next champions trophy if they decide to do it

And if it went through, there would be an outcry in the future when a 'bad' decision went through because the team had already used it's 3, so they'd make it 6, then 10, then unlimited...so in time every decision would get appealed.

 

[marc71178]

It would be so much easier if Umpires could just have a word in the ear... and if "did he hit it" could be referred. WITH use of Snickos.

Except of course that tends to ignore the fallability of Snicko.

 

[Richard]

Such as in the cases of...?
I've never once found Snicko to be unreliable.

 

[marc71178]

Except when it cannot prove 100% what the ball has hit.

 

[age_master]

What happens if the 3rd umpire gets it wrong, can the team than appeal to the 4th or the match referee to have a look at it.

there are umpires on the field for a reason are ther not.

 

[Sehwag309]

...On field Attorneys and Paralegals

 

[SJS]

This is quite silly if true. Does only the fielding side get to appeal or the batsman too ? I find the eagle eye finds more balls going over the stumps than umpires do .

If they really think umpires need to be given tech support ;let them be allowed to check on two things, where the ball pitched and whether there was a snick (snickometer). The 3rd umpire should only communicate what he sees (including inconclusive if thats what he sees) and the decision should still be left to the umpire in the middle.

This will enable him to use the evidence from the 'gadget' only if he thinks it is conclusive otherwise he can go ahead and decide on his own including giving the benefit to the batsman.

 

[marc71178]

This is quite silly if true. Does only the fielding side get to appeal or the batsman too ? I find the eagle eye finds more balls going over the stumps than umpires do .

I personally don't trust it yet.

 

[age_master]

i don think its anywhere near 100% yet, despite their claims