Third Umpire Reviews

Fine

I'm not complaining about the outcome of the result of the review just the fact that you automatically lose one of your reviews when the decision is so minuscule

"I'm not complaining about the outcome of the result of the review just the fact that you automatically lose one of your reviews when the decision is so minuscule"

The system isn't there to challenge marginal calls, it is there to correct blunders. That decision was not a blunder, so it remains with the umpire.

The system can work really well, if everyone uses it for its intended purpose.

Yes fair point

It does work very well but that doesn't mean it cant be improved on ....In Scottish law they don't just have a Guilty or Innocent verdict they also have a "not proven" ...I don't see why they cannot have something similar on this review system that allows for a "too close to call" which gives the batsman not out but also doesn't punish the bowling side either

> In Scottish law they don't just have a Guilty or Innocent verdict they also have a "not proven"

Hmm, interesting. Wise people, indeed.

> I don't see why they cannot have something similar on this review system that allows for a "too close to call" which gives the batsman not out but also doesn't punish the bowling side either

Agree with the above.

That is assuming that we just must have the players (and not the umpires - either on the field or the third umpire) calling for the use of UDRS. Which I find fundamentally repugnant to the spirit of cricket.

it's an interesting point.

there have been instances for example where a referral has been made but where the cameras etc did not have the correct shots to make a judgement on the matter. in thos circumstances the referring side has still lost their review, which to me appears to be wrong.

when you are getting into situations though where the technology available gives conflicting views on certain matters, you have to wonder whether the whole system is undermined.

jpb....TBH all I want is a bit of middle ground if the third ump struggles to give a verdict then as always the benefit of the doubt must go to the batsman
but I dont see why the bowling side should be punished by losing a review

The idea of giving back a review just adds to making cricket and the drs system more complicated.

As someone has said it is there to correct the obviously wrong decisions.

If it had been given out the batsman may not of asked for a review as he may of felt the slightest of touches on the bat Batsman from all countries may ask for a review even if they felt the slightest touch hoping that the technology will not show this up.

I believe that the technology should be kept but only used by the umpires if they are in doubt. Referral requests from the batsman should be discontinued. The technology can be used by the cricket boards to assess umpire performance, producing a league table to assist in selection of umpires for future games.

goadocwatson

Morning ....Interesting idea they already are happy to use a review to decide run outs hmmm something I'll have to have a hink about ...cheers

One problem I can see happening is that players MAY badger the umps to seek a review and that may cause problems