3 doesn't always equal 3, Umpiring

3 doesn't always equal 3, Umpiring

Post by Ravindra N. R » Thu, 30 Jan 1992 09:11:09


We hear from several Australian netters that whereas the current standard
of umpiring might be bad, there is no bias in favour of the local boys. I for
one believe this but I would like to remind these same netters of the Packer
series in Australia. I believe it was the third test (could have been the
second). Simpson had ordered all his batsmen to use their pads against Bedi and
Chandrashekar. It was a terrible day's cricket. The Australians, including
Simpson who spent most of the day at the crease, were completely lost; it was
a pathetic display of soccer. MacGilvray was disgusted, Bedi livid and
Chandrashekar almost in tears. The exception was Hassett who, stubborn and
stupidly parochial beyond belief, described it as a classic example of
defensive batting against good spin bowling. MacGilvray was quite firm in his
conviction that India, on that day, had been mugged. Robbed of many bat-pad
and LBW decisions. No Australian can convince me that someone of Simpson's
stature had nothing to do with the decision of umpires on that day. Despite
this, there was no real criticism of the umpires in Australia.

Now to say that there have been an equal number of bad decisions against both
teams is to perhaps state a fact. Definitely not to be confused with the full
picture. For instance, a bad decision against Srikanth is not the same as a
bad decision against Whitney. As another instance, when the score is say 4/90
making it 5/90 after after having been 4/50 at one stage is quite different
from the effect of a similar decision taking the score from 4/300 to 5/300. To
supply statistics and claim that 3=3 with the implication that all's well is
not much more than Dingo dung.

Coming back to the present almost all of the plight of the Indian team is of
their own making. Their batting is so far below expectation that a bad
decision takes on much more significance. The Indian team can point no fingers
here. Gavaskar has already told us that the Australian umpires aren't worth
a pinch of 'roo excrement. Azharuddin and his men should leave it at that and
concentrate on trying to bat for more than two sessions for a change.
(By the way, any comparison between bad batting and bad umpiring is silly.
Kangaroos and Kookaburras actually.)

The only good thing about this tour is that India can't possibly play much
worse. So the best thing they can do is get out of Australia for a week after
the fifth test to regroup. The idea would be to get into a fresh and proper
mind set for the world cup. They can start by all pledging (and showing) their
unconditional support for Azharuddin (and also keep Srinath happy with lots
Idli, Sambar; refer to your local (South) Indian for an explanation :-)). In
fact I firmly believe that *anyone* who doesn't show this support should be
dumped.

Come to think of it, there's not a lot for Australians in anything that's
happened either. A series victory almost certainly; but one that's been
virtually handed to them. The second innings in this test is their best
batting effort. However it comes against what is still a mediocre attack, on
a pitch that evidently has no problems for a determined batsman. They have yet
to face the Sultans of Swing from Pakistan, Waqar and Wasim.

Ravi(ndra) Rao

 
 
 

3 doesn't always equal 3, Umpiring

Post by Krishna Swaroop Kollu » Thu, 30 Jan 1992 06:07:14

I think Ravi Rao is being extremely generous in his assessment of the
umpiring.

Of course there is bias. Everywhere in the world. Any guesses as to
what Azhar must be thinking.

"India ko aao, Dekhte hain kaun century marta! kaun wicket leta!"

We'll see who scores a century or who grabs the wickets, when
Australia visits India next.

I guess I kinda agree with Miandad. It all evens out, in the ultimate
analysis.

kittu..

--
-------

Silicon Graphics, Inc.                          Off:(415)335-1859
                                                Fax:(415)969-2314