'Use Of Technology Not Always Conclusive'

Despite rapid strides made in umpiring thanks to technology, veteran cricketer and seniorumpire Srinivas Venkataraghavan says he would like to make only limited use of the third umpire because technology cannot provide conclusive evidence in every case.

"Except in cases of direct hits inducing a close run out or similar incidents -- like whether the wicketkeeper or thefielder had the ball in his hands when the bails came off or the fielder made body contact with the rope on the boundaryline -- which as an umpire, I cannot determine, I will not like to refer to the third umpire," he said in an interview.

Venkataraghavan, a former skipper, who is the only Indian in ICC's elite panel of umpires and did duty in the World Cup in South Africa, saidwhere technology cannot provide conclusive evidence, gestures like the one by Adam Gilchrist would make the umpires' jobeasier.

Gilchrist had walked on his own in the World Cup semi-final against Sri Lanka despite not having been ruled out bythe umpire. Such gestures help the "spirit of the game", Venkataraghavan said. 

In particular, he raised doubts over the effectiveness of TV replays determining leg before decisions -- one of the newrules introduced on an experimental basis in the ICC Champions Trophy in Colombo last year -- saying the technology used was"debatable".

"If the straight camera is not in line and even one millimeter away from the stumps, it (the image it gives) can be distorted. And, if the cameraman is not good enough, it can create problem. The camera, which is 100 yards away and 100feet high, is not transfixed. So, it could create parallax," said Venkat who played 57 Test matches for India, captainingin five of them.

"Though it is accepted by people that it is the right thing to do, it will provide clarity only if everytechnicality involved is perfect. If all the parameters are attended to, definitely it will be exact," he said.

The 58-year old Venkat, however, welcomed the experiments at Colombo and said they could not be implemented at the WorldCup in South Africa due to various reasons.

"Like the other ICC umpires, I fully appreciate and welcome the experimental conditions. It took some time forthe ICC to compile the whole gamut of playing conditions.

"They did not have enough number of technicians to go around the many grounds in South Africa and were not able toconform to uniformity. Perhaps, the ICC did not enforce the experimental conditions in the just concluded World Cup forthese reasons," said Venkat, who has so far officiated in 64 Test matches and 51 one-day internationals.

Venkat said he had discussions with the ICC on the rule according to which the batsman cannot be ruled out leg beforewicket if the ball pitched outside the leg stump.

Under the new experiments carried out in Colombo, the umpires could ask for the third umpires opinion on leg beforedecisions too.

"It definitely holds up play but there are hold-ups in cricket even otherwise. If I am in doubt on the ball that pitched on the leg stump, I will first ask the third umpire whether it pitched on leg stump and if the answer is positive,then give the decision only after ascertaining the height and bounce of the ball and whether it would have hit the stumps,"Venkataraghavan said.

Satisfied that he got about 95 per cent of his decisions correct, he said like players, umpires too went through "badpatches" and could commit mistakes. He said umpiring was a very "demanding" profession and it was only natural thatmistakes would occur sometimes.

"Every single umpire in this world will commit some mistakes. We expect everyone to understand that we have lessthan half a second to make our decisions," he said.

He explained that for bowlers like Shoaib Akhtar or Brett Lee, who bowl at 90 miles per hour or more, it took less than0.4 seconds for the ball to reach the batsman.

"During those 0.4 seconds, the umpire has to watch for the no-ball and then fix his eyes on the trajectory of theball to make numerous other decisions."

He also emphasised the fact that umpires were the only ones who spent seven hours a day on the field.

"It is physically very demanding and more strenuous than playing. Each and every match is a pressure situation for theumpires," he said.

Venkataraghavan said he was never swayed by the reputation of the players while making his decisions.

"There would never be any consideration that the decision was against players like Sachin (Tendulkar) or Steve Waugh orthat the appeal was being made by Glenn McGrath."

He said it was important for umpires to handle pressure well and drive home the point that he was in command. "The communication skills of an umpire matter a lot inthese situations," he said.

Venkataraghavan, who has been in the ICC panel for over a decade, said there had not been much change in the attitude ofthe players towards the umpires over the years.

"It has almost been the same. May be it has undergone a change, but not a sea change. Certain teams try to putpressure on umpires without realising that they are appealing too much. English players are pretty good in their approachwith umpires. They understand the situation better than anyone else," he said.

Welcoming the ICC's policy of having neutral umpires, he said, the system provided an opportunity for the local umpiresto gain experience from observing the international umpire in a tight situation and also remove the bias in theminds of players and spectators.

PTI