Trial by Fox Sports

It was the kind of Saturday where men in wedding suits sweated even bigger bullets than they might normally expect to.

As the mercury soared to an unheard of 39 degrees in Hobart and wildfire raged unchecked through the Derwent Valley, I lay prone on my sofa for very nearly nine hours with the radio, tuned to ABC local, bringing word of the Ryobi Cup final from Adelaide where South Australia took on Tasmania in a winner-takes-all final.

But it was more than that.

It was winner-takes-all-unless-it’s-a-tie-and-then-the-Redbacks-win final.

And it was a heartbreaker for fans of George Bailey’s Tigers.

For Bailey himself the pain of loss must be acute. The skipper steered his side to the very precipice of victory with a masterful ton – his second at domestic level since taking over the reins of the national T20 side – in a 174-run partnership with none other than Ricky Thomas Ponting, the veteran also cruelly denied after his part in the run chase.

Perhaps worst, though, is the manner in which Bailey had the game ripped from his grasp.

From the second ball of Gary Putland’s final over, Bailey survived an LBW shout and hared off to the other end.

Until Fox Sports stepped in, that is.

Bailey became the victim of the Ryobi Cup’s ludicrous, and it must be said, occasional, use of Fox Sports replays to determine whether an umpire has made the correct decision.

This is not the Decision Review System the BCCI vetoed from use in the summer’s international contests, this is mere bush league stuff in comparison.

Such is the hit-and-miss nature of the review system in place in the Ryobi Cup that had Bailey been hit on the pad from the final ball of the match’s penultimate over he would likely have been spared.

Fox Sports would have cut to an add break, removing the possibility for the vision to be replayed quickly enough to affect the game.

Instead, Putland dawdled and a faceless man in an OB van parked on the Adelaide Oval concourse hit the button labelled ‘Hawkeye’ and, quite literally, re-wrote history.

The third umpire happened to be shown a damning replay, radioed his man in the middle and Bailey got his marching orders.

It should be duly noted that Bailey has benefitted from the same system on a number of occasions this season.

Twice against Queensland in the final round-robin match in Hobart, Tasmania had not-out decisions turned their way when the Bulls were batting.

Tigers opener Jon Wells was later spared a walk back to the pavilion when Bailey seemed to question the umpire from his spot at the non-striker’s end as the Tigers chased down Queensland’s total with ease.

After the match, Bulls coach Darren Lehmann was bemused with the system.

“I’d like to see it actually go the whole hog. Go referral full stop,” he said, can of XXXX Gold in hand and the faintest whiff of cigarette smoke hanging in the air around him.

“They got decisions right in the end of the day, so that’s the main thing. But just have it all in I reckon, so it’s here and the third umpire can make a decent decision.”

With his next breath, Lehmann defined the real problem with the system. Teams are told the third umpire will view incidents once – and only once.

But anyone who’s ever seen a commercial network broadcast of a cricket match knows that once soon becomes twice, thrice and beyond.

“(We’ve been told) they can only look at it once and quite quickly, but I’m sure they look at it a few more times than that and make decisions from there.”

“When you see players just walk back slowly because they think it might be out, like happened a few times, it’s just not great for the game.”

It’s this element of Trial By Fox Sports that really churns, like a day old mixed-meat kebab, in the pit of my gut.

While I could easily be accused of taking a rather partisan view on the issue given it relates to a loss for Tasmania, the truth is that anyone following domestic cricket should be worried that a) administrators are copping out when it comes to providing just playing conditions; and b) the influence of broadcasters is casting a foul shadow across the upper echelons of the game in this country.

For years now, umpires have been consistently undermined by the brainless ramblings of Channel 9 commentators who contradict the two men in the middle at every turn.

Their previously incontrovertible status as the game’s ultimate decision makers has been eroded by the all-too-familiar voices of summer who seem to have forgotten that a batsman is not out if the umpire says so.

I remain convinced Tony Greig et. al. would sell their sisters into the sex trade without a second thought if ‘Hot Spot’ made it look like the right thing to do, let alone harp on for an hour about the merit or otherwise of a non-decision.

Memo to all commentators: concentrate on the cricket being played, not the graphic being displayed. It will be to your credit and the benefit of the game.

It’s almost like some of those guys are bored by the cricket they watch. And who could blame them? Being stuck in the same job, without promotion, for 30+ years has got to be soul destroying.

But it’s with the pen pushers at CA that the real issue lies.

The Ryobi Cup looked to bounce back to something like a respectable competition this season, following the aborted split-innings format that was abandoned at the end of last summer.

Now it’s a genuine proving ground for the national 50-over side – with one major flaw. Players can be dismissed – or not dismissed – purely on the basis of a television replay.

Remember, this is not DRS. It’s not clinical. It’s not consistent. It makes a mockery of any credence that is left in one of the game’s foundation stones; the umpire’s decision is no longer final.

To his absolute credit, Bailey wasted no time reflecting on the proverbial spilt milk.

"When I saw a replay … it looked pretty out," he told the ABC.

"It's a better system but it still needs a bit of tinkering I think, there are still a lot of grey areas.”

"It has come up a lot at end of match meetings – I have no doubt the umpires and captains will sit down at the end of the year and just nut it out.”

"If they hadn't had that opportunity that would have been not out and we probably win the game."

But to be denied the chance to finish the job against South Australia in the manner he was seems more than a simple karmic twist and hearing his magnanimous reaction in a post-match interview is a measure of the man.

Michael Klinger, the South Australian captain, was also asked to comment on the turning point.

Jubilant in victory, Klinger’s reaction revealed how simply the current system can be manipulated.

"We thought it was out," he said.

"But you're not allowed to ask so we took our time a little to give the third umpire time to see it.”

"We slowed everything down and he had another look and it was given out, as it rightly should have been."

Wrong, or right, Bailey’s dismissal is now the stuff of folklore. It will be talked about for years by anyone who saw it – or heard it described – and rather perversely may eventually be for the good of the game.

There must now be a review of playing conditions and, as Darren Lehmann has suggested, the DRS should be employed wholeheartedly.

And if it’s not, let the umpires do the umpiring, let the players do the playing and let’s remind the commentators to call the game objectively.

They are not the arbiters of the sport and they should goddamn know better than believing they are.

 

 

Photo by Hamish Blair/Getty Images AsiaPac