Three appeals allowed
The ICC has now decided
to allow players to appeal
against umpiring decisions. Fielding team captains and the batsman involved are the only ones who can approach the on-field umpire with a request for a review of the decision.
It is interesting that the ICC Cricket Committee was majorly split on the issue (6 votes in favour, five against). Shouldn't important decisions of this nature require an absolute majority vote? The committee proposed a maximum of three
appeals allowed for either team in a one-day international. I wonder how they settled on that number. Is this an acknowledgement that umpires get at least three decisions wrong per one-day innings? Assuming that in a 50 over game, there is at least one appeal per over (quite high, I'd reckon!). If the umpires are getting 47 out of those right, then it works out to the 94% statistic that Dave Richardson mentions repeatedly.
What we hope the trial will do, if approved, is to help eradicate the very few obvious errors that may be made by umpires, who already get between 94 and 96 per cent of decisions right at international level.
I'm not clear about how the system will work. Richardson says
Each team will be allowed three appeals to the third umpire per innings. If the appeal is successful they will retain the right to three appeals but if not, then it is lost.
It does seem unfair to me that if the first [or second] appeal is rejected and the original decision upheld, the team cannot use the remaining appeal(s)!
The other thing that is interesting about the whole idea behind experimenting in the ICC Champions Trophy
is how the experiment in 2002 hasn't quite survived to tell the tale. In the 2002 edition, umpires were allowed to refer to the third umpire for lbw decisions, such as if there was an inside edge. Shoaib Malik lbw Vaas
was the first [and only?] instance, the third umpire being Rudi Koertzen. This also did give rise to a question which I cracked in a quiz contest a couple of years ago. Mugshots of three cricketers were shown and the question was to connect them. One of the visuals was very obvious - Sachin Tendulkar. The second was a little tougher, and was Shoaib Malik. The third was the clincher - Roland Holder (and I was the only one to identify him!). So what is the connection?
Sachin Tendulkar was the first to be declared run out by the third umpire
, Roland Holder was the first to be given out bowled by the third umpire
while Shoaib Malik was the first to be given out lbw by the third umpire.