Also Read: Muzumdar appointed head coach of Indian women’s team

Lack of understanding  

Poll

Who will win the Punjab Elections?

BJP 32.76%

AAP 43.10%

INC 24.14%

Submit

View All In Poll

It’s astonishing that a modern international cricketer still struggles to understand the Umpire’s Call concept.  In Warner’s case against Sri Lanka, he was given out by Joel Wilson and Hawk-Eye went on to confirm that it was grazing leg stump. So the umpire was vindicated—he judged that the ball would hit the stumps and the technology supported him.  A ball travelling at that speed would definitely dislodge the bails. End of story. End of innings. Start of tantrum.

When Sadeera Samarawickrama was dismissed in almost identical fashion by an Adam Zampa wrong-un a few hours prior, Warner was no doubt celebrating Wilson’s precision in giving him out.  If Wilson had chosen to give both decisions in favour of the batsmen, both would have survived.  That’s the way Umpire’s Call works Davey—they haven’t suddenly changed the rules just for you! The hypocrisy is breathtaking.

David’s execution error

Warner alludes to the fact that the umpire made an error of judgement in the first instance by giving him out.  Fact? Hawk-Eye proved that it was not actually an error—according to the technology, the ball was hitting the stumps.  Same as Samarawickrama. If you want to start criticising umpire error, begin first by looking in the mirror. Had the batsman not made an error of judgement and missed the ball in the first place, Wilson would not have had to make a decision. So the crucial first error was Warner’s—assuming he meant to hit the ball with his bat, it was an execution error that brought the umpire into the game.  

Warner will argue that it’s a game played by humans and therefore human error is part of the game. Of course it is. But to exclude umpires from making errors is a nonsense. All humans are prone to making mistakes under pressure. 

That is the beauty of sport. Nay, it is the very essence and purity of it. Anything else would be like playing against a computer or Artificial Intelligence. 

Does Warner think that Australian batsmen should be given more benefit of the doubt than Sri Lankans? His argument might have carried more weight if he also mentioned the Samarawickrama lbw but to only feel aggrieved at his decision smacks of a sense of entitlement and privilege. The tournament is being played in India but favouritism for the colonials is from a bygone era. Or maybe there are still echoes of that sense of privilege…has Warner been censured by the ICC? Claiming to be frustrated is a pathetic and tired cliché—no batsman enjoys being given out lbw but some are allowed to use that excuse more often than others. 

Warner then goes on to suggest that umpires’ performance statistics should be shown on the scoreboard so that we can all see how many decisions they get wrong. Apart from being a ridiculously immature suggestion, in this instance, it would have proven that Wilson was in fact right and the judgement error was the batsman’s. Where does this madness end? Do we also show how many times a batsman plays and misses? That too is an error after all. If we are going to put the spotlight on umpire errors, let’s also put up statistics on how many times each player has referred a decision that was overturned or not upheld. That sort of analysis might actually show how difficult it is to make snap judgements at 130+ kmh. Batsmen and umpires are both entitled to mess up their judgement by a millimetre.

Umpires are not to blame

If his issue is with the technology itself, that’s not necessarily the umpire’s fault.  It just smacks of sour grapes when he only complains about it when he thinks he is on the rough end of it. Bottom line—if you don’t want to be lbw, hit the ball. Be perfect. Every time. If that’s unrealistic, don’t hold umpires to a higher standard than you hold yourself. The umpires and cameras generally get it right most of the time. They even spotted Sandpaper in a pocket!