> When are the Umpires going to become questionable for their errors?
You mean "answerable", and there is continuous monitoring of the
decision-making accuracy of umpires whose decisions are reviewable on
video. From time to time, this decision-making accuracy is published -
SJA Taufel was the leader of the pack at last report. However, the
appointment of these umpires (to their panels, not to particular games)
is an annual contractual process, so a guy who has a long run of bad
games at the wrong stage of the year is destined to remain in the loop
> Do they even have any self pride and self respect in their performance?
I can only speak for myself and the umpires whom I know personally, and
the answer is obviously Yes. Of course, the question was a rhetorical
> And yet the game fires out a very good decision maker in Darrell Hair
> and keep gooses like Davis, Billy Doctrove, Rudi Koetzen and Steve
> Bucknor in the game.
Like many others in the past who have identified certain umpires by
name as underperformers (or geese, if you like), you have failed to
name the men who would do a better job. So you would dispose of
Koertzen - is Howell or Hurter going to do better? I can ask just as
many rhetorical questions as you.
The task of umpires would be made a little easier if players did not
appeal for that which they know is not out. I guarantee you that
Franklin and McCullum knew that Strauss had hit the cover off the ball
- why did they appeal? Why did they not withdraw the appeal? "Sorry,
Straussy. Sorry, Steve. We appealed unfairly, and in the spirit of
cricket we do not think that two wrongs make a right." Why do Match
Referees not act against teams who appeal falsely? - we can talk all
day about players making more mistakes, on balance, than umpires; but
players appealing speciously is not a mistake, it is deliberate.
Incidentally, halfway through typing the above, I have seen Davis
incorrectly call No Ball for a full toss. A wide margin of error
should always apply to such judgements, especially when it is
line-ball, and the replays suggest strongly that the ball bowled to
Flintoff was dipping and would NOT have been above the waist at the