Video technology bares its fangs

The controversy of the first day of the Boxing Day Test at the MCG is only a controversy because Channel Nein insisted on deploying its technology despite it not being available to either teams or umpires.

 

Test cricket has survived for more than 100 years without high technology assistance. Sure, there were dodgy decisions from time to time, but that was part and parcel of the process. Umpires are (allegedly) human and are expected to make decisions based on what they are sure that they see.

 

AussieRulesBlog will never impugn the integrity of the officials, but, despite there being very specific written processes for umpiring games, individuals will always have distinct idiosyncratic interpretations of those processes.

 

We raise this “controversy” generated by Channel Nein since it demonstrates why there have been controversies in AFL in relation to scoring decisions. Those controversies would have little of the widespread impact they have had were it not for the broadcasters’ highlighting of the ‘error’.

 

We weren’t watching Channel Nein yesterday, but, on past form, we assume they played and replayed and replayed the controversial footage ad nauseum, as is their wont. That was certainly the way the AFL scoring issues played out.

 

It’s also worth noting here that broadcasters’ technology rarely, if ever, shows the incident from the perspective of the umpire. The image of the ‘hot spot’ on Hussey’s shirt is from side on (below). Let’s see the same incident from the umpire’s perspective at the bowling end stumps and see how clear cut the technology makes it from there!

 

 

The issues, for both cricket umpires and Aussie Rules umpires are really rooted in human frailty. For the cricket umpire, judging the bowler’s front foot placement in relation to the popping crease and then judging nicks and LBWs at the other end a fraction of a second later is a big ask. For Aussie Rules goal umpires, judging the position of the ball in relation to a goal or behind post whilst in the jumble of a 360º game is also a big ask.

 

But, and here’s the rub in these controversies, the technology can’t give a 100% guarantee of being right either. And it probably never will — unless the games are completely virtual and a computer can assess against its own data.

 

These cricket incidents demonstrate the dangers of allowing broadcasters to deploy technology that is not available to officials. Umpires would be well within their rights to refuse to stand in these tests while Channel Nein deploys these technologies that are not available to them. Whether it is the Indian Board or any other reason that the technology is not employed, its use in these circumstances is absolutely and entirely inappropriate.