Sydney, Dec.11 (ANI): There is no doubt that the umpires review system dominated the Adelaide Test between Australia and the West Indies, but noted cricket columnist Peter Roebuck is of the view that it was just a revolutionary experiment, and therefore, there was no need to consider a rolling of heads, notwithstanding the all-round unease felt about the system during the game.
"By general consent, it (review system) created as many problems as it solved. Sometimes the cure can be worse than the disease. However, that does not mean the idea itself is fatally flawed. It's too early to tell. It won't be possible to make any lasting judgment while it remains a work in progress," Says Roebuck in a syndicated column for the Sydney Morning Herald.
The match contained several contentious decisions and one surprising overrule. All of the controversies involved Mark Benson, an umpire with a record of ill health.
Benson left the field at stumps that day and was out of the Test and Australia, flying home to England.
Eventually he emerged to announce that he had been too sick to continue, and added that he supported reviews and that his withdrawal was unconnected with the overruling. Journalists reported that he had raged in the umpire's room after play.
"The important thing is to get as many decisions right as possible without unduly interrupting the flow of the game. If the system achieves that, it has merit. If not, it ought to be scrapped. An umpire's feelings are neither here nor there. They get well paid and can learn something from misjudgments," concludes Roebuck. (ANI)