Boon for batsmen, a nightmare for bowlers
Manoj Madhavan -
Monday, July 07, 2008 2:39 PM
A new rule was tested in the recently concluded Asia Cup, which allows the batting side three chances to appeal against the umpire’s decision, and seek the opinion of the third umpire. The rule, introduced on a trial basis, aims to minimize bloopers by the umpires.
This rule, skewed as it is, only allows a batman to appeal. The bowlers can’t seek the third umpire’s views under the rule.
Some people do argue that bowlers get six deliveries, or chances, to make amends while a batsman could lose his wicket on one delivery. Therefore, a batman has no chance to play further if he’s given an out erroneously.
In cricket most rules benefit batsmen—be it one bouncer per over rule, or the wide ball down the leg side.
My query is that why can’t bowlers appeal against an umpires decision?
They also should have equal rights to appeal against a caught behind decision or an LBW which has been turned down by the umpire. My heart goes out to Kumble who’s LBW appeals are often turned down.
I have the a suggestion regarding the new rule:
In an ODI match, batsmen as well as bowlers should get a chance to appeal against the umpire’s decisions, but such appeals should be restricted to three per team. This would also test bowlers who make “fake” appeals.
One, this would check excess appeals. Two, the rule will equally and fairly apply to the players. And this will make the game more interesting and fun.