Umpires or video?
| 8
|
by user Alex Holowczak
There have been a lot of people lately rallying the use of video replays to help the umpiring decisions.
Different sports have different stances:
| Video | Umpire |
|---|---|
| Rugby | Tennis |
| Cricket | Football |
| American Football | Baseball |
| Ice Hockey | Field Hockey |
(N.B. I don't know about basketball's stance, but can those that do please add it to the table)
Each sport has different times to use the video replay...
Rugby
Only used to judge scoring of a try.
Cricket:
Only to judge run outs, low catches, or stumpings.
American Football:
Three challenges per half on any issue, with the forfeit of a timeout should the result rule against the challenge.
Ice Hockey:
The referees discretion.
There are two obvious arguements for and against using video replay. One is that it will make the umpires redundant if a video can do it for them, and the alternative is that too many decisions are wrong by human officials.
Are the games using video better for it? If it takes a minute it's fair enough, but the NFL takes more than the 90 seconds it is supposed to. The idea of the NFL's ruling may extend to cricket, where England coach Duncan Fletcher has written to the ICC to implement it.
Many sports are proud of their traditions, and do not care for video. In the example of tennis, using "Hawkeye" for TV lead to an altercation. Tim Henman thought he was being hard done by on some line calls, so he glanced up to the BBC commentators who signalled he was right. Wimbledon is said to be looking at bringing it in in 2007. After all, Wimbledon already has Cyclops, whenever a serve misses the box, or hits the net, there is a loud beep in the umpires ear, but has extended so that it can be heard by the crowd.
Replays often bring tension, as the delay of a decision makes for excitement whilst you wait for a decision to be made.
A fear is that cricket umpires will become people that count the balls in the over (i.e. when they change ends), and he will have nothing else to do.
The umpires of the world are slowly being asked to leave sports all over the world, and in my opinion it's a shame. Professionalism makes decisions so important as it can have huge financial implications. This adds pressure to the umpires, that don't deserve it. In the amateur realm, no-one tends to mind a bad decision now and again.
Or should a bad decision be tolerated now and again. After all, it's only a game. Isn't it?
Date
Sun 06/25/06, 2:17 am EST
