Dear Editor,
We must be very careful how the technology available to us is being used lest the results create some confusing effects. During the last CPL game between Amazon Warriors and the Red Steel a situation occurred which needs to be addressed. An appeal for stumping was made. The square leg umpire quite rightly requested the intervention of the third empire. By use of the technology available the third umpire declared that Bishoo, the bowler, overstepped the line; hence the delivery was deemed a ‘no-ball’ and as such the batsmen was not out. We all know what happened after that. The standing umpire who has the responsibility of monitoring the bowler and calling ‘no ball’ when such deliveries are bowled, did not in this case deem the delivery a ‘no-ball’, so from that perspective one will assume that the delivery was legal. If the batsman who feared the delivery in question was clean bowled or clearly caught, would the umpire have sought the intervention of the third umpire? I don’t think so. This situation will undoubtedly have an effect on the credibility of the umpire as he failed in his responsibility to effectively execute his duties, which included monitoring the bowler and calling ‘no-ball’ when such deliveries are made and the bowler overstepped the line.
This situation also occurred at a very crucial stage of the game.
Yours faithfully,
Colin Gill
