Sporting thoughts
What should have been an entertaining and enjoyable few days in front of the telly for England's Test Match against Sri Lanka was marred, for me, by the diabolical umpiring performance of one Daryl Harper. I felt cheated, having given up five days of my life to enjoy a great sporting occasion, only for the result to be decided by the random incompetence of the protean official.
Then it dawned on me - if I was annoyed, how would Trescothick and Hussain feel, having trained for the last few months for this moment?
If Trescothick had stayed in, surely the Somerset man could have forced on the score such that England could have posted an attacking declaration at around three on the last day. To have such a potentially thrilling Test Match ruined by the unfair dismissal of such an exciting batsman was a disaster and an embarrassment for the sport.
Of course the brunt of the blame must go to Harper who somehow managed to miss a clear inside edge, and then added to his incompetent display by giving Hussain out, also for LBW, to a ball which clearly pitched a good few inches outside the leg stump. However fingers must be pointed at the Sri Lankans for their own repeated raising of the finger, a policy of appealing with frightening regularity and speculation.
It seems that Daryl Foster's advice has been 'appeal often enough and the umpire is bound to give him out sooner or later.' It may not be Shakespearean but sadly, due in no small part due to sympathetic umpiring, it seems to be working.
So what is the solution to this problem? I see it as being threefold. Firstly the ICC need to take firm action against excess appealing. I am not just talking about the Sri Lankans here, although the repeated appealing for LBW by left arm seamers bowling across right handers and hitting the pads outside the off stump is a good example. Speculative appealing needs to be stamped out, but sadly the only way this is likely to happen is if bowlers know that there is no chance of getting a positive reaction unless the batsman is definitely out.
Which leads me onto my second point. In a sport such as cricket with frequent, long stoppages, the refusal to use TV replays for such purposes as are useful seems almost deliberately obtuse. I am not advocating the use of Channel 4's 'Hawkeye' technology until extensive tests are carried out to prove its worth, but surely it would be worth using a slow motion reply for possible inside edges and also to tell whether or not a ball has pitched or hit in line with the stumps. These are simple things that umpires get wrong time and time again - the technology is there, surely we should be using it?
Finally Harper's most recent display demonstrates the folly of the ICC's decision to appoint eight 'elite umpires' to stand as neutrals in all tests. The system is simply too inflexible. Now that we all know about Harper's obvious failings will the England batsmen feel comfortable at the crease with him? Surely his presence will do nothing but encourage the Sri Lankans to even more excessive, speculative appealing.
Obviously no umpire can be right all of the time, but there is an obvious method to ensure that they are right more of the time. With so much at stake in, and so much written about, modern Test Match cricket, surely we should make sure that results are decided by the ability of the players. Sport should be about the sportsmen - not the officials.
30th May 2002