Does standing in a test with Daryl Harper drag you down to his level? Or have we just got another duff umpire on the ICC Elite Panel? From the bits of play I have caught of the 2nd test between New Zealand and Pakistan, the one thing that has caught my attention the most is the awful standard of umpiring by Rod Tucker.
The edge that Mohammad Hafeez got off Chris Martin’s 2nd over of the day was blatent, there is really no excuse for a so-called elite umpire to be missing that. The same umpire gave Hafeez a bad decision in the 1st innings as well, but nothing as bad as this one.
ICC have a lot to answer for. When it first came in I wasn’t the biggest fan of the review system (mainly down to Harper’s use of it on the England tour of West Indies in 2009) and I still think it has a lot of room for improvement. But that was a prime example of how the review system could improve cricket, it was an absolute stinker by Tucker and would have been overturned.
If ICC would foot the bill and put the cash in there could be no argument. It is just unbelievable really when you think about it. They are the ruling body and have no clear structure of when, where and how the technology should be used. They seem more interested in just trying to avoid paying for it.
In what other sport would the games ruling body not be prepared to put up the cash to implement the use of technology that would improve their own game?
I didn’t see any of the game, but I think they have a tendency to be a bit too impressed in Australia with the fact that they’re starting to produce umpires who used to play at first-class level. Tucker is one, Paul Reiffel (who looks quite good) is another, also Bruce Oxenford. Tucker may have been promoted a bit too quickly on the basis that he used to play, rather than because he’s a good umpire.
Historically very few Australian umpires have played first-class cricket and this goes for their three best umpires of recent years Taufel, Hair and Davis.