Karma, bad umpiring or just the law of averages?

India has become the first team from the sub-continent to have beaten Australia at Perth. This long- impregnable Aussie bastion has been breached by a bunch of young Indian bowlers. The Indian team and the Indian fan is understandably cock-a-hoop with joy. And with good reason. Fan after fan has said that after what happened at Sydney, the victory at Perth is even sweeter. Some have even spoken of karma. But wait just one moment….

At Sydney, we lost because of a combination of shoddy umpiring AND our inability to play out the last session (remember we lost 3 wickets in one over by a part-time bowler). At Perth, a large part of credit must undoubtedly go to our consistently better bowling, gritty batting and better-than-usual fielding over the 4 days. However, should it choose to, does Australia not have reason to complain about the quality of umpiring yesterday? Symonds got a touch of bat before the ball hit his pad, but was declared lbw at a crucial stage of the match. How diferent is this from the second innings at Sydney, where Dravid was adjudged caught behind off Symonds (oh the irony!), when replays showed that his bat was behind the pad and did not make contact with the ball. The outcomes of both games may well have been different, had the right umpiring decisions been made on these two and all the other occasions where the umpires have erred in the last two games.

Two wrongs do not ever make a right. But like in every other aspect of life, the law of averages does inevitably catch up. Poor umpiring decisions have been around for as long as the game itself. But now, with supposedly “technology{ being used to improve the quality of decision-making, people’s expectations of umpiring standards have (naturally) risen higher. Let us not forget that umpires need to make split-second decisions based on what they see/hear (or not!). As armchair critics, we have access to the full power of “technology” (the hawk-eye, snick-o-meter etc.), backed by the opinions/comments of various commentatorswho are watching the action live. At Perth alone, there would have been a few 5-ball overs, had not the 3rd umpire stepped in. Maybe it is time to redefine the role of umpires to just making sure that the spirit of the game is not breached on the field (and maybe adjudging no-balls, wides and byes). Leave everything else to a group of two off-field umpires who have even greater access to “technology”.

If Australia asks for Asad Rauf and Billy Bowden to be replaced, only Taufel, Coertzen and a couple of other umpires will be left in the “ICC Elite” panel. And after Adelaide there may be none!

PS: The best technology can also only be perhaps 80% accurate in terms of its ability to “predict”. For instance, where a ball will go after it hits a crack on the pitch is hard to model.  And often, that may be the difference between an lbw decision and a not-out.