For some time now the BCCI has been cast as a demon by ICC's former veto-power countries' media. Snide remarks and leaks to the English and Australian media by influential voices in those countries and even within ICC made it seem that the BCCI was responsible for all the ills dogging cricket.
The malicious plethora of blame ranged from BCCI's position on the Decision Review System to IPL to television money to cricket schedule to pitches to every other issue related to the game.
How ironic then that with the BCCI far removed from the scene, it is the two Ashes combatants who are smarting under a string of goof-ups, almost all of their making. Tragically for them there is no big, bad wolf to blame for what must already go down as one of the touchiest of series.
DRS, which was hailed as the greatest invention since sliced bread, is in a veritable pickle. The joke though was when the inventor of the so-called Hot Spot admitted that batsmen were confusing the gizmo by using metallic stickers on their bats. He insisted that the Hot Spot be used with an enhanced snick-o-meter as a back-up. As seen in the Ashes series that is no cure either, as third umpires are also confused by the snicks; not sure whether these are triggered by the sound of bat hitting ground or ball brushing the pad.
-------
Also read
Cricket and DRS - The Best is not the Enemy of the Good
On Walking - Advice for a Fifteen Year Old
------
The benefit of doubt, which traditionally went to the batsman, now tended to go in favour of the Snick-o-meter and Hot Spot! When the mistakes became too glaring to ignore, vested interests, much in the fashion of the American Gun Lobby who claimed "guns don't kill people; people do" stated that it was the umpires who goofed up on interpretation and not their 'hallowed' gizmos.
But DRS was not the only sore point. Bad light became an issue in the Ashes Tests much like Tests in the past. These two Ashes nations which attempted to make other countries play Tests under lights did not want to use similar floodlights to dispel darkness. Yes, the lights were switched on, but were not good enough to support Test cricket!
This was the last straw for Australia who believed they have borne the brunt of the many errors. Their skipper Michael Clarke was seen vehemently arguing with the umpires on live television. At the end of the day's play David Warner revealed that Clarke thought the light was good enough but the umpires thought otherwise.
Did Clarke bring the game into dispute by arguing publicly on the field of play? Most cricket-loving viewers would have thought so. But did the ICC's match referee too see it that way? Time will tell. That brings us to the cricket pitches. Were they ideal for batting?
Not really. Not when the ball turns square in the midst of the match, or the odd delivery leaps off a length. Had this been an Indian pitch we would not have heard the last of it. But Australia and England, they have their own rules and they'd be happy if everybody (read as BCCI) too plays to those rules.
No comments:
Post a Comment