I am amazed to hear that 96% of the decisions taken by Mr Steve Bucknor is last 2 years were correct, which is very impressive while the average for the elite panel of ICC umpires is 94%. Bucknor should very well keep on officiating during important matches, if we go only by this statistics.
But, should this be the only criteria to judge an Umpire's performance. If an umpire is giving 96% correct decisions, it means he is physically fit and able to see and hear the ball clearly. Have ICC ever looked into the fact that most of the wrong decisions by Bucknor have come against team India. Doesn't that show a clear bias on Bucknor's part. I would prefer to have an umpire who is less accurate, but unbiased rather that taking someone who is biased against any particular team or country. The only purpose of having umpires in the game is to have an unbiased decision. Having umpires like Bucknor defeats the purpose of umpiring.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment