Steve Bucknor accuses TV of doctoring images
A bit of an umpiring bombshell has been dropped as Steve Bucknor has accused TV crews of doctoring images to make umpires look bad::
"Mats [the line graphic used to adjudge lbw decisions] have been moved, balls have disappeared, ball hitting the bat and only coming up into the fielder's hands, but between the bat and the hand, no ball is found and you are told, 'Sorry, we don't have that clip, we can't show it'. In the beginning of my career, umpires were trusted. When umpires said not out, the man was trusted, so they would say he is a good umpire and nobody questioned him. Today, the technology shows up his mistakes, and makes life a little bit difficult for umpires, especially when it has been known to happen that technology has been used to make umpires look bad."He reminds me of a ranting dad at a family get-together. Everything's a conspiracy against him... back in his day, he was respected, dammit! I don't think TV crews have to work too hard to make umpires look bad - they're doing a pretty good job of that themselves.
| Posted by JC on Sun 7 May |  3 comments |
One cannnot fathom why Bucknor, Venkat and Bird are objecting. Cricket is a money spinner and a lot of passion and money goes into the game and with it is prestige . If technology can support a wrong from being committed and can eliminate human errors it would benefit the game, the supporters, the players and all concerned. If this means a little less authority for the on field Ump, so be it. A larger section of people , the game , and the players will benefit in contrast to a few on-field umpires. Ironically does it not strengthen the third Umpire ? So all in all an Umpires' dignity as a group still remains intact.
Steve Bucknor has raised the issue to cover up for his own mistakes. There were several times when he made glaring errors in adjucating LBW decisions which has cost India the match and a player his reputation. Sachin has been at his receiving end. Jonty scored 91 and prevented India from winning against SA as Bucknor refused to allow TV replay though Jonty was run out in 91-92 in SA .
Venkataraghavan as a player himself was at the centre of atleast two controversies - when Shambhu Paan ruled him caught behind when he was not out, which caused spectators to disrupt the Test match in Brabourne stadium in 1969-70. Second occasion was in England at the Oval in 1979 when Venkat was ruled runout though he was inside the crease . India could possibly have won the test match had he been ruled otherwise. India ultimately drew that Test missing the target narrowly by 9 runs . I am not sure if it was David Constant or Ken palmer who gave that decision . There are several instances such as these.
Technology will also reduce allegations of bias. Those who have read Sunny Days by Sunil Gavaskar will admire the little master's comments on David Constant who ruled Sunny out lbw at critical times even though the ball used to pitch outside the leg stump. And of-course can we recall the retort by Chandrasekar to a NZ umpire when he asked him " He is bowled , but is he Out ? " .
Have we forgotten how Pakistani umpires used to favour Miandad, Zaheer Abbas , Muddassar Nazar , Majid khan and company while playing India ?
Posted by Nitin Gokarn on 2006-05-12 04:48:03
Steve Bucknor has raised the issue to cover up for his own mistakes. There were several times when he made glaring errors in adjucating LBW decisions which has cost India the match and a player his reputation. Sachin has been at his receiving end. Jonty scored 91 and prevented India from winning against SA as Bucknor refused to allow TV replay though Jonty was run out in 91-92 in SA .
Venkataraghavan as a player himself was at the centre of atleast two controversies - when Shambhu Paan ruled him caught behind when he was not out, which caused spectators to disrupt the Test match in Brabourne stadium in 1969-70. Second occasion was in England at the Oval in 1979 when Venkat was ruled runout though he was inside the crease . India could possibly have won the test match had he been ruled otherwise. India ultimately drew that Test missing the target narrowly by 9 runs . I am not sure if it was David Constant or Ken palmer who gave that decision . There are several instances such as these.
Technology will also reduce allegations of bias. Those who have read Sunny Days by Sunil Gavaskar will admire the little master's comments on David Constant who ruled Sunny out lbw at critical times even though the ball used to pitch outside the leg stump. And of-course can we recall the retort by Chandrasekar to a NZ umpire when he asked him " He is bowled , but is he Out ? " .
Have we forgotten how Pakistani umpires used to favour Miandad, Zaheer Abbas , Muddassar Nazar , Majid khan and company while playing India ?
Posted by Nitin Gokarn on 2006-05-12 04:48:03
Post New Comment
You need to be logged in to post a comment. If you're new, register here. Existing users, login via the right margin.
