Joel Wilson versus Kumar Dharmasena

[Beamer]

This thread sent me down a YouTube rabbit hole, which ultimately had me come across this.

Hadn't ever seen this before. It's quite astonishing that after sandpapergate, this was the guy they decided to put in Aus head coach role..

Good Lord. I had forgotten about that one.

 

[OverratedSanity]

This thread sent me down a YouTube rabbit hole, which ultimately had me come across this.

Hadn't ever seen this before. It's quite astonishing that after sandpapergate, this was the guy they decided to put in Aus head coach role..

Among the many videos politely provided when an Australian poster asked for examples of aussie cheating in this thread :

http://www.cricketweb.net/forum/cricket-chat/77683-how-do-you-rate-w-g-grace-5.html#post3995570

 

[Bolo]

Vaughan said neutral umpires should be canned and used Kettlebrough as an example of someone who should be an ashes umpire.

What a load or rubbish. We just had him in the India test and he made just as many errors.

Not exonerating Joel Wilson as he has been awful, but Kettlebrough was equally bad in recent matches yet less talked about.

Canning neutral umpires is about the worst suggestion i have ever heard. As crappy as guys like Bucknor were, who screwed up series results due to ineptitude, at least he wasn't predetermining series results on purpose like 80s Pakistani umpires or 90s Australia umpire(s).

Luck plays a big part in cricket. I'd prefer we minimised it it terms of umpiring by using better umpires and better tech/rules.

But the suggestion that we revert to a time when jingoistic umpires played as much of a role in the outcome of a series as the players themselves is pure idiocy.

 

[Beamer]

Canning neutral umpires is about the worst suggestion i have ever heard. As crappy as guys like Bucknor were, who screwed up series results due to ineptitude, at least he wasn't predetermining series results on purpose like 80s Pakistani umpires or 90s Australia umpire(s).

Luck plays a big part in cricket. I'd prefer we minimised it it terms of umpiring by using better umpires and better tech/rules.

But the suggestion that we revert to a time when jingoistic umpires played as much of a role in the outcome of a series as the players themselves is pure idiocy.

Agreed. I also think it's massive arrogance to suggest English and Aussie umpires are the best. Anyone watching Kettlebrough recently knows that's not true.

 

[a massive zebra]

Agreed. I also think it's massive arrogance to suggest English and Aussie umpires are the best. Anyone watching Kettlebrough recently knows that's not true.

Who said that?

 

[Beamer]

Who said that?

Vaughan and Chappell. Thinking it through, that probably explains that ?

 

[a massive zebra]

Vaughan and Chappell. Thinking it through, that probably explains that ��

Over time, I've learned to become oblivious to Michael "Never knowingly not a ****" Vaughan. He is the very embodiment of an obnoxious, inflammatory, publicity hungry troll. If Vaughan were a CW member we would have banned him.

 

[Bahnz]

Agreed. I also think it's massive arrogance to suggest English and Aussie umpires are the best. Anyone watching Kettlebrough recently knows that's not true.

Tbf, the umpires (Gough, Oxenford and Illingworth) in the recent NZ v Sri Lanka series were pretty good. Can only think of a couple of poor decisions across the 2 matches.

 

[TheJediBrah]

This thread sent me down a YouTube rabbit hole, which ultimately had me come across this.

Hadn't ever seen this before. It's quite astonishing that after sandpapergate, this was the guy they decided to put in Aus head coach role..

That's bizarre. I mean it's obviously not "cheating" though, any more than Smith looking up at the dressing room when wondering whether to review is cheating. It's just being ignorant and/or moronic. Clearly they didn't think that they might actually get the guy out by flicking the bails off when there are tv cameras everywhere.

Canning neutral umpires is about the worst suggestion i have ever heard. As crappy as guys like Bucknor were, who screwed up series results due to ineptitude, at least he wasn't predetermining series results on purpose like 80s Pakistani umpires or 90s Australia umpire(s).

Luck plays a big part in cricket. I'd prefer we minimised it it terms of umpiring by using better umpires and better tech/rules.

But the suggestion that we revert to a time when jingoistic umpires played as much of a role in the outcome of a series as the players themselves is pure idiocy.

The biggest reason that neutral umpires are necessary isn't the risk of bias, it's the risk of perception of bias. Every time and umpire makes a call that benefits their home country's team people are going to interpret it as a biased decision.

 

[SillyCowCorner1]

Reigniting the fire.

Go Joel.

 

[morgieb]

The vibe I get from Kumar is that he's generally fine but prone to massive clangers whereas Jo-el is all round fairly poor. Would think Dharmasena is better.

 

[SillyCowCorner1]

Joel is a good umpire, but I think he buckled under the pressure of the Ashes...

He is not the best umpire in the region though. Leslie Reifer Jr. is; probably because he's much younger

 

[Migara]

These guys are immense in comparison to some blatantly biased Pakistani umpires of yesteryear like Shakeel Khan, Shakoor Rana and Javed Akhtar.

You can add Ross Emerson and Steve Randall as well.

 

[SillyCowCorner1]

Asoka De Silva in that Port of Spain test match in 2002.

 

[Migara]

Asoka De Silva in that Port of Spain test match in 2002.

Ashoka was a shocker let it be with bat, ball or with the coat.

 

[vcs]

It's like asking to rate the better poster out of trundler and *****.

 

[duffer]

Kumar got that ***y voice though

 

[SillyCowCorner1]

Kumar got that ***y voice though

Anything is better than that ugly trini accent of Joel.

 

[trundler]

It's like asking to rate the better poster out of trundler and *****.

Et tu, vcs?

 

[SteveNZ]

Agreed. I also think it's massive arrogance to suggest English and Aussie umpires are the best. Anyone watching Kettlebrough recently knows that's not true.

Then who is? It certainly ain't Dharmasena. That leaves Dar, Erasmus, Gaffney and Wilson on the elite panel. Perhaps the English and Aussie umpires are the best, not saying they're outstanding but they're probably the best on balance.

The idea of neutral umpires should have been squashed years ago, when umpiring at the elite level became fully professional. I don't think any umpire would feel any particular affinity or duty to their country in terms of decision making. Certainly there wouldn't be any more influence than a local crowd is able to exert on an umpire, neutral or local. Any umpire who is seen to be partisan wouldn't survive very long, and would lose their status and income as a result.

We had the situation where Taufel couldn't umpire a World Cup final for a decade, when he was far and away the best umpire. Let the best umpires umpire the big games. If it's the Ashes, have one from each nation. The only problem is that fools like Vaughan would then try to find an angle on bias, even though they suggested the idea in the first place.