A fool can ask more questions than a wise man can answer…. Only if the wise man is foolish enough to try to answer all of them correctly :-)
This one struck me at the thought of my satellite communication's end-semester exam... quite relevant in that context i think :p
January has been as full of good sporting action as always. With the Indian tour of Australia being covered on one channel and the Australian Open being covered on the other, getting up early has been worth the effort all holidays.
There has been one very noticeable difference between the two sporting events, the difference being that the action from cricket has been full of ‘dubious’ decisions from the umpires, and tennis has been absolutely clean with no attention being given to the umpires at all. (It just occurred to me that umpires not being given attention is a credit to the fact that people are happy with the decision-making going on in the sport… and also that fans tend to know the names of all umpires from cricket and never know the names of the chair umpires in tennis)
What has tennis done differently? Simple enough to answer… Used hawk-eye and used it in the best possible way (referring to the 3 challenge rule here). What is ICC doing to answer the problem?... Proposing to increase the number of umpires in the elite panel to 12. So should we expect better umpiring in cricket in the times to come? The answer is obvious. If the umpires ICC rates the best aren’t able to take the right decisions, how can we expect these new additions, who were not good enough in their eyes to be in the elite panel to begin with, take better calls?
When use of technology is proposed, the argument that runs in cricket is that no technology is a 100% sure and so cannot be used. (btw.. they do admit that hot-spot is a 100%er but forget it while making this comment). Well, that bewilders me because if the umpires are correct 50% of the time while making 'close calls' and technological aids help make correct decisions 90% of the time, why would anyone want to rule in favor of not using technology (at least as a part of some 3 challenge rule like the one in tennis and also with an operator who knows how to use to technological aids)?
Well, I would just like to end the post here by saying that to get rid of the “human-errors” as they call them, it’s time to take a little more help from the inspired human creations.
We all know what is happening in Australia with the Indian cricket team and in my opinion, this Australian team is full of cheaters (except for Brett Lee)… Anyway, that is not the point I am trying to make here and this post is NOT AT ALL related to cricket or recent cricketing issues.
See, after what happened down-under, there have been reactions pouring in from every part of the world. What has been heartening is that the whole country of ours has united to support the national team in its time of crisis and this kind of unity is exactly what India is about… Anyway, that is not the point I am trying to make here.
There have been reactions from ex-cricketers too. People like Sidhu and Wasim Akram have been blasting the aussies as well as the officials. Their comments show just how passionate they are about the game and that everyone is reduced to a normal cricket fan after retiring… Anyway, that is not the point I am trying to make here.
Reactions have been there from the aussie media too. Peter Roebeck (an ex-cricketer) has become popular in our country after he, in his article in the local daily, used very strong words to voice his opinions against the current Australian team. And it shows that success in Australia may not be equal to popularity sometimes… Anyway, that is not the point I am trying to make here.
On the other hand, there are ex-cricketers who have not been in the news for their comments for the team. They may have watched the matches and may care for the team, but somehow they haven’t had anything to say or maybe the media didn’t reach out to them.
The Indian team having received all this support have felt stronger and appear more eager to fight than they were immediately after the Sydney test. It’s interesting how support, that too just moral support, can lift a team up in its time of crisis… Anyway, that is not the point I am trying to make here.
I ask you… If the Indian team has felt better (if at all it has) because of all the support it has received, who is most responsible for it? If you were the Indian captain, whom would you appreciate and be thankful for most and least among the following people: the Indian ex-cricketers who made their support and protests know through strong words, the Australian media who have written against their own team and extended support to us as guests or the ex-cricketers who care but don’t make it known in a big way????
The team here can be equated to an individual… The Indian ex-cricketers are friends who care and have made it known to you in bad-times or even other times…. And I leave you to equate the remaining two categories yourself…. After all, I know you are smart enough to do that…. Anyway, that is not the point I am trying to make here…. :-)