Use of Technology in Cricket - I

In the last few years, as technology has evolved, I have been curious to understand why it is not used more in international cricket, to aid umpires thus stopping them from making blunders that change the course of a match. The argument given is a lame one, saying that it evens out in the long run. What a ridiculous explanation for hiding the inconsistencies of umpires? I mean, if someone had given a wrong decision against VVS Laxman in his epic 281 against Australia in 2001, would that have evened out? India would have lost the series, and Laxman would have been fined for questioning the umpire’s decision. (By the way, he was given a rough decision in the first innings of the same match!!). Assume that someone is given a rough decision in a match like a World Cup final? If someone’s career ends because he gets a wrong one from the umpire? How does that even out?

 

We have a whole host of arguments, against the use of technology in assisting umpires in decision making, beautifully explained and negated by Amit Verma in his blog 23-yards. I have been a fan of this blog, and the author clearly states the objections and answers. The author also tries to clear the doubt that technology will replace umpires. What I will do is try and take this a step forward.

 

Over the course of the next few posts, I shall try to reason why use of technology is a must, and why the sooner people realize this, the better it is for the game. But then, cricket is a game of glorious uncertainties, and umpires are the chief sponsors of those uncertainties. When shall we realize that I watch a match to see Sachin bat and Mcgrath bowl, and Jonty field, and definitely not to watch Steve Bucknor give an incorrect decision when it is least required.  

 

I agree that umpiring is a thankless job, but then that is all the more reason why technology should be used to aid umpires. In the next post we shall discuss Hawk Eye, and try to reason why people are against using it in cricket.