What is Nielsen's objection to the challenge system?

Australia's cricket coach Nielsen has expressed reservations over the introduction of the new tennis style challenge system in cricket. Careful analysis reveals that he has sound basis to his objection.

.

"It means almost one-third of the (10) wickets that you need to get a team out, you can contest, which seems like a high number to me."

Don't you think it is one challenge too many?

Update:

A grounder on the what exactly the 'challenge' is.

Under the proposal, each team would be limited to a maximum of three unsuccessful challenges per innings. The on-field umpire would consult with the third umpire when a decision was challenged, before the on-field umpire gave the final decision.

This is exactly how we felt about umpiring

View this video in the context of the Sydney Test match and Clarke’s bump catch appeal.

Does Bucknor’s deserve our sympathy?

If you were to go by what he has to say in his defense, then it is assuredly a big whooping NO!

Here is what Bucknor says in his defense:

"To err is human, to forgive divine, as the old saying goes. However, I consider
it a sad day to see umpires sidelined after making only two wrong decisions out
of a record of 35 appeals."

He would have certainly gone up in my estimation if he had expressed remorse on making two erroneous decisions which changed the course of a Test match.

Furthermore, his capacity for self-delusion is astonishing. He is talking about 2 bad decisions, whereas by my count there were 4 bad decisions.

Undoubtedly, removing an umpire for making bad decisions is a bad precedent, but by portraying himself as man more sinned against than sinned; Bucknor reveals an unabashed aptitude for self-pity and a longing for sympathy.

Surely he does n’t deserve our sympathy?

David Shepherd on Technology and umpiring

David Shepherd contends technology is the only answer:

"'Technology has got to be used more,' Shepherd said. 'We are judged by technology and people have started thinking that the technology is better than the umpires. That's not true: on an lbw appeal, an umpire is better placed to judge whether the ball will hit the stumps. But perhaps the TV could help check whether there was an inside edge."

This is an opinion held by a large number of cricketers, fans and even administrators.

However it is incomprehensible why umpires still loath to use technology.

Cricket : R.I.P.

- 06/01/08

Sledging okay says Taufel: But please be original

Cricket's No.1 umpire Simon Taufel says he along with other umpires feel that there is nothing wrong with players having a go at each other as long as it is within bounds.

Taufel like any other sportsman loves sledging when it is original and witty.

Unsurprisingly, Taufel named serial glarer Andre Nel of South Africa as one sledger who'd become a tad boring.

"I was in Pakistan recently with Andre Nel playing for South Africa against the Pakistanis," he said.

"Andre unfortunately only had one line that he was dishing out to Shoaib Malik and the boys so it got a bit monotonous there.

"We just had a chat to Andre and said to (captain) Graeme Smith, 'well, look he's only traipsing out one line, it's getting a bit boring."