Umpire Shortage for the Ashes

Just reading in the Times today, 8 of the 12 'elite' umpires in cricket today are either English or Australian. Therefore, for the ten Ashes test matches, only 4 umpires are left for the on-field and TV duties: Aleem Dar, Kumar Dharmasena, Tony Hill, and Marais Erasumus.

After Aleem Dar's poor umpiring display in the first Test, which may have been influenced by Ramadan, he is going to be replaced by Marais Erasumus for the second Test - the same chap who missed Agar's stumping and Trott's inside edge on the TV.

Because of this shortage, second-tier umpires may have to take charge for some of the Ashes, with recently relegated umpire Billy Bowden next in line.

It's rather frustrating, and there may be a further reliance on DRS, but what can you do?

1 English umpire and 1 Aussie umpire. Simple. If they are the best then use them! In the modern day with TV replays and DRS a biased umpire will last about one Test match, if that. I think we can trust them. If they are the best, give them the biggest games.

I wouldn't mind that. Don't really believe umpires are biased - at least consciously - but I guess it is the perception of bias that dissuades the authorities from returning to the old system.

By the way I still rate Aleem Dar as an umpire...he just had a bad match. It happens.

This was a problem which was inevitable when the latest update to the Elite Panel was made. The reasons are understandable though - the best available replacements for Rauf and Bowden were English and Australian. The rest of the International (second tier) Panel doesn't exactly fill you with confidence.

Dar was always scheduled to miss the 2nd Test. He will be back later in the series. The appointments for this series are all Elite Panel members so barring some very strange happenings there will be no need to resort to the International Panel (which has quite regularly been used to fill gaps for Test Matches).

Whilst all three officials had difficult matches at Trent Bridge I wouldn't criticise them too much. Dar has been an outstanding umpire, though he seems a little out of form. Erasmus and Hill are usually pretty solid. Dharmasena is a very good young umpire though still a little bit error prone.

The problem has basically been that over the past couple of years there has been an unusually high number of people leaving the Elite Panel for various reasons - Harper, Doctrove, Rauf, Bowden, Taufel. That has meant all of the members of the International Panel that previously had been assigned to Tests have since been promoted (Dharmasena, Illingworth, Llong, Kettleborough, Oxenford, Reiffel). In fact the only non-Elite umpires with Test experience are now Enamul Haque (1 Test) and Russell Tiffin (44). I can't see either of them being assigned during the Ashes down under so I'd imagine we'll be seeing a lot of the 4 eligible Elite Panel members.

alfie wrote:I wouldn't mind that.  Don't really believe umpires are biased - at least consciously - but I guess it is the perception of bias that dissuades the authorities from returning to the old system.

By the way I still rate Aleem Dar as an umpire...he just had a bad match.  It happens.

Spot on. If Paul Reiffel rather than Erasmus has been adjudicating the Agar stumping everybody would have screamed 'bias' rather than 'shocker'. Even if it was just human error, which happens.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/cricket/23333065

The ICC admit giving Trott out LBW was a mistake. Fair play.

To be fair to Dar, he's usually one of the best umpires going. I wouldn't see a problem with any Aussie/English umpire doing it, but there would be a field day in the media if an Aussie ump gave an English batter out LBW and it wasnt out

Olly wrote:To be fair to Dar, he's usually one of the best umpires going. I wouldn't see a problem with any Aussie/English umpire doing it, but there would be a field day in the media if an Aussie ump gave an English batter out LBW and it wasnt out

Which over the course of 10 Tests would be bound to happen on a number of occasions. Nobody (or very few) would go out trying to be biased but there were good reasons for the move towards neutrals.