|
|
 |
 |   |
EVENTS Fantasy Central Inside Game Video Plus Statitudes Your Turn Message Boards Email Newsletters Golf Guide Cities 
CNNSI.com GROUP
COMMERCE
|  |
Who cares? Cricket's no-ball debate is a non-story
Despite all the improvements that video technology is bringing to international cricket, I find the current obsession with no-balls to be rather annoying. Thanks to the close-up camera at the popping crease, television viewers are able to see if the bowler is over-stepping the mark with each delivery. This often means a minor media uproar if a wicket falls and the replay shows the bowler had delivered a no-ball that was undetected by the standing umpire. For example, in the second test at Lords, Marcus Trescothick was given out caught behind for 15 in England's first innings even though the replay showed that the foot of Australia's Jason Gillespie landed beyond the bowling crease. England was also on the receiving end in the losing second test against Pakistan at Old Trafford, with several wickets falling in the second innings when Pakistani fast bowlers overstepped the mark. Several British reports made quite a big deal about the oversights. Here's my reaction to this shocking development. Who cares?! Unless it's proven that bowlers are deliberately cheating or that umpires are favoring one team over another, the occasional, overlooked no-ball that leads to a wicket is just part of the game -- a genuine mistake. It would be ridiculous after each dismissal for the men in the middle to consult the third-umpire to ensure the bowler hadn't no-balled. Wouldn't that be captivating for the crowd? It's no secret that the front-foot rule for no-balls is difficult for umpires, who are required to check the bowler's delivery stride before looking up to watch the batsman. Former Australian captain Allan Border made the good suggestion that the square-leg umpire move to a position closer to the bowler's end, where he can have the sole responsibility of calling no-balls. With video technology, the third-umpire is now king of run-outs, meaning the square-leg man can serve in a different, more useful way. The use of the instant replay for run-outs and even catches is a wonderful addition to the game. It adds to the on-field drama and is fair to everyone. But it was never meant to take over some of the other responsibilities of the umpires. Otherwise, we may as well have two ball-counting, sweater-holding, gum-providing, video-computers replacing human beings in the middle. English cricket has indeed fallen to a desperately low level if journalists and officials start to blame defeats on missed no-balls. Anyone who's played even the lowest form of cricket is familiar with the ultimate comeback line for an opposition player who whines about a supposedly incorrect decision from the umpire that led to his or her dismissal. "You say you weren't out? Look in the scorebook!"
Jason Dasey is co-host of World Sport, the international sports show that airs live on CNN/Sports Illustrated and CNN International.
| |||||||||||||||||||||
