TheSportsCampus

< Prev		Next >

The ICC Cricket Committee concluded its two-day meeting at Lord's on Tuesday agreeing to recommend a phased roll-out of the umpire decision review system (UDRS) in Tests from October 2009. The recommendation followed consideration of the results of trials of the system over the previous nine months.

It agreed the concept of day/night Test cricket should be explored with the possibility of a trial match in 2010 providing key factors were established beforehand. These factors included successful tests of an appropriate colour ball, a clear indication that day/night Tests were what stakeholders wanted and successful trials at first-class level.

The committee also agreed to recommend stricter penalties for players and captains guilty of failing to maintain an acceptable over-rate. Host boards, umpires and match referees should also take responsibility for ensuring that everything within their control was done to ensure over-rates remained as high as possible.

The committee was chaired for the first time by former West Indies captain and World Cup winner Clive Lloyd, who took over from ex-India captain Sunil Gavaskar. And the meeting was attended by highly respected figures within the world of cricket, including David Richardson, ICC General Manager - Cricket, former Australia captain Mark Taylor and Ian Bishop, the former West Indies fast bowler, the last two named now respected commentators on the game.

It also featured umpire of the year Simon Taufel, chief ICC match referee and former Sri Lanka captain Ranjan Madugalle, South Africa coach Mickey Arthur and Tim May, the former Australia off-spinner and now the chief executive of the Federation of International Cricketers' Associations as well as Clare Connor, the head of women's cricket for the England and Wales Cricket Board.

The committee considered the results of the umpire decision review system, which was trialled in four separate Test series over the past nine months.

It considered the following questions and came to the attached conclusions:

· Was the number of overall incorrect umpiring decisions reduced? Yes.
· Was there an undue negative influence on the pace of the game? No.
· What was the effect on the players and did the process of placing the responsibility on the players for deciding whether a decision should be reviewed work? The committee concluded this was the most appropriate way of handling the review system; the past experience of the Johnnie Walker Super Series in 2005 when the umpires had the opportunity to call for reviews showed that path was not effective as it led to umpires doubting their own abilities and slowed the game down.
· Was the process (request for review, consultation and the conveying of the final decision) practical? Yes, although it was agreed it needed fine-tuning.
· What was the effect on the umpires and was the authority of the on-field officials unduly compromised? The committee concluded any possible negatives were far outweighed by the positive effect of ensuring more correct decisions were made.
Were there any other positives or negatives to be considered? It was considered of vital importance that further training of the umpires in the processes was necessary ahead of any further use of the UDRS. This would be to ensure maximum levels of consistency in the implementation of the system. It was also noted that the use of the UDRS reduced examples of player dissent which may otherwise have occurred following incorrect decisions.

The four series in which the UDRS was trialled were Sri Lanka v India (August 2008), New Zealand v West Indies (December 2008), West Indies v England (February/March 2009) and South Africa v Australia (February/March 2009).

The system afforded players the opportunity to request a review by the television umpire of a decision made by the on-field umpire they believed to be incorrect. The third official was able to view the available television pictures and relay information back to the umpire on the field who then had to decide whether or not to reverse his original decision.

In the first two of the four series involved in the trial each side was allowed a maximum of three unsuccessful appeals per innings. This was reduced to two per side, per innings for the remaining series that formed part of the trial.

On the basis of its conclusions, the committee agreed to recommend that there should be a phased roll-out of the system from October 2009. The committee's recommendations will now go forward to the ICC Chief Executives' Committee and the ICC Board, both of them meeting at Lord's in late June, during the ICC's annual conference week.

ICC Chief Executive Haroon Lorgat said: "I'm excited that the committee concluded that the umpire decision review system had a positive effect on the game. It reduced the number of incorrect decisions and also cut down on the instances of player dissent. The committee's recommendation will now be taken forward to the ICC Chief Executives' Committee and the ICC Board and if both those groups agree then we will seek to roll out the system from October 2009.

"The time ahead of that date will allow us to firm up the playing conditions, technical specifications and protocols, ensure additional training for match officials and further brief the players so that the process can be successfully implemented."