The argument against referrals and third umpires is that it tends to slow down the game and hence kills spectators interest.
However Manjrekar, holds the view that whenever a third umpire is brought into the picture there is enhanced interest among viewers at the ground and in front of the TV.
"The spectator interest rises whenever a decision is referred to the third umpire. Yes, there could be some slowing down of the proceedings, but I feel the bigger culprit is the dismal over-rates maintained by teams which slows down the game a lot," said the 42-year-old former India Test and ODI middle order batsman.
Personally, I find them enthralling. Particularly, when the decision is critical and has the potential to change the course of the match.Then, the 'decision pending' card on the big screen holds as much interest as the last ball of an ODI or a Twenty20.
On the flip side,the constant replays required for an obvious decision tends to irritate.
I expect waiting for the referral decision to be as enthralling as the third umpire decisions.
How do you find the third umpire decisions? Do you think they are a impediment to the speed of the game or do they add drama?
Technorati Tags third,referrals,umpire
2 comments:
Referals are oky but they shd show only the final result and not the entire process. Showing the entire process has made evryone in the ground an expert and it embarasses the umpire no end.
R,
I see, you feel strongly for the 'ball counters'.:)
Post a Comment