Review of umpiring decisions in the Sri-Lanka vs India series good or bad?

Question

What?

It allows players to seek reviews, by the third umpire, of decisions by the on-field umpires on whether or not a batsman has been dismissed.

When?

A player can request a review of any decision by the on-field officials concerning whether or not a batsman is dismissed, with the exception of "timed out". No other umpiring decisions are eligible for review. Each team can make three unsuccessful requests per innings, which must be made within a few seconds of the ball becoming dead; once made, the requests cannot be withdrawn.

Who?

Only the batsman involved in a dismissal can ask for a review of an "out" decision; in a "not out", only the captain or acting captain of the fielding team. In both cases players can consult on-field teammates but signals from off the field are not permitted.

How?

A review request can be made by the player with a 'T' sign; the umpire will consult the TV umpire, who will review TV coverage of the incident before relaying back fact-based infrm't'n.

Answer 1

I think its good.

Answer 2

It will be a good move as no team can complain about favourtism or ill treatment by the umpire.

Answer 3

I think it will be good for cricket. It will make it more clean. And i think this system is good because it doesn't allow technology to take over. I read 'Sir KiwiJoey's' answer and he's right, hot spot has proven to be accurate. so why not use it?

I think once this system is used you will find a few flaws but i think they will be fixable.

Answer 4

yes this is what it is required and they should have this system in all the formats of the game cricket........

Answer 5

www.tvnsports.com

find out live for free!!!

Answer 6

Why not? If it will help to eleviate all the controversy, then I'm all for it. Each decision is meticulously picked over by the media anyway, so I am all in favour of the players having the benefit of it. There may not have been so much bitterness after the Sydney Test match between Australia and India in January had the use of technology been allowed.

And I saw the '3 challenges' system being used quite effectively at Wimbledon this year.

Answer 7

Since we are not on the field we can only suggest things.. I feel, its now welcomed by almost all players.. Its a lesson for  Bucknor, Benson and all the B*****'s who give nasty decisions..

Answer 8

It is a good idea as bad umpiring decisions are less likely to have a large influence on a match.

But, there is one thing wrong with this system. From the Cricinfo article on this issue, "Technology

The TV umpire can use slow-motion, ultra-motion and super-slow replays, the mat, sound from the stump mics and "approved ball tracking technology". Snicko and Hot Spot are not to be used. "

Approved ball tracking technology = Hawkeye.

Hot Spot is reliable - it has yet to be proven wrong and is similar to the technology used by the military, which means it must be EXTREMELY accurate. So why can't it be used to make decisions?

Conversely, Hawkeye is not ALWAYS correct. Most of the time it is, but it is just not accurate enough to be used in the judicial process. The third umpire should not be allowed to use Hawkeye when resolving these challenges.

Answer 9

its good