Sack Bucknor!

Officiating in any sport is one of the most difficult and thankless jobs. It is a place where not just the players in the arena at the 'receiving end' show their disgust, even sports lovers glued to their television-sets thousands of miles away from the action can launch a hate campaign.
As India combat Australia in the second Test at the Sydney Cricket Ground, one man who will be remembered for a long time, irrespective of the result, will not be Sachin Tendulkar, VVS Laxman, Sourav Ganguly or Harbhajan Singh, but the widely respected West Indian umpire Steve Bucknor.
If you thought it was just a coincidence that the Indians have been at the receiving end of some poor decisions for many years, be sure Bucknor, the man who nods his head gently before raising the dreaded finger, has figured in it.
As far as familiarity with rules go, Bucknor cannot be faulted. Not many would be aware that long before Bucknor became a member of the ICC's panel of Elite Umpires, he officiated in football matches. Bucknor was a FIFA referee in the World Cup qualifier between El Salvador and the Netherlands two decades back. Soon after, Bucknor had to retire from refereeing because the FIFA age limit for referees was lowered to 45. However, it did not stop him from pursuing a career as a cricket umpire.
And what a career it has been. Just as our own beacons like Sachin, Sourav Ganguly and VVS Laxman have battled it out to reach where they are today in the world of cricket, Bucknor has carved a niche for himself. Yet, many a time when there have been aberrations in umpiring decisions concerning matches where India have figured – Tests or ODIS — Bucknor has found himself in the middle of controversies.
It would be preposterous to state that umpires or referees, no matter what the sport, are biased. The world had looked at cricket umpires with suspicion in the decades gone by when certain Pakistani umpires were in the middle. The joke then was that a team playing in Pakistan was not taking on 11 players on the field, but also two men in white coats too!
Times have changed. The ICC's Elite Panel is supposed to consist of umpires equipped with good vision and heath, sound knowledge of the rules of the game, and above all, integrity. We won't doubt Bucknor on any of those counts. But if the word 'bias' can be used, Bucknor will find mention, even though it cannot be proved in black and white.
Bucknor is on record saying that Indians are guilty of excessive appealing in matches. And this was long before when we had a certain S.Sreesanth on the scene as a medium fast bowler who dared to stare at the batsman standing 22 yards away.
To chronicle instances when Bucknor has been in the middle of faulty decisions concerning India is something which can be done better with the help of a cricket statistician. Just that what he did on the first day of the Sydney Test, when he let off Andrew Symonds to carry his innings on will rankle for a long time.
It is a well-known fact that one decision can never alter the course of any contest. But this is cricket, where the umpire in the middle is supposed to be extremely alert and is in the best possible position to adjudge a caught behind or a leg before wicket decision.
The era when we had batsmen like the stylish GR Vishwanath walk back to the pavilion when they had edged or were certain they were out of the crease, are over. Today, a batsman like Andrew Symonds, even if he knows he is out, will not walk back. He will wait for the umpire to give his verdict – right or wrong.
Indian cricket captains have, in the past, complained in writing how they have felt about Bucknor. In fact, in the 2003-04 series against Australia at Sydney, when India were on the verge of a series win on the final day, Bucknor had refused a number of close leg-before decisions against the Aussies. Skipper Ganguly, in his post-series report to the International Cricket Council (ICC), rated Bucknor poorly and with adverse comments.
Nothing came out of it. And if any Indian batsman has been a "Bucknor victim", it is none other than maestro Sachin Tendulkar. Maybe, after Sachin retires from cricket, he will devote an entire chapter to this issue in his biography. These days, when players get pulled up so often, you cannot expect Sachin the genius to say anything on record.
Just to jog the readers' memory, way back in 1992-93, in the first post-apartheid series against South Africa, Bucknor became famous when he punched the third umpire's eye. In the Johannesburg Test, the Proteas were reeling at 73 for five. The Indians appealed for Johnty Rhodes' run-out. Bucknor refused to take the third umpire's help. Replays showed Rhodes was clearly short of the crease and went on to score a match-saving knock.
A lot has changed since then. Today, while other umpires have no hesitation in consulting replays, Bucknor is a cut above the rest, or so he feels. He doesn't need any help and has the enviable record of having stood in five successive World Cup finals since 1992. But the icing on the cake was the 2007 final in West Indies, after which Bucknor became the butt of ridicule. He seemed to be the only one not aware of the fading when Sri Lanka were losing to Australia.
As long as Bucknor has the ICC's backing, he is going to be there in the middle. He is 61and still going strong. FIFA has set an age limit on referees and it probably is high time for the ICC to start thinking on same lines.
But the ICC should also get its act together and makes umpires like Bucknor more accountable. If not, we are going to lose faith in the concept of neutral umpires totally. Or are we seeing the last of Bucknor in this series, if signals from the ICC headquarters are to be taken seriously?


(Appeared in Mail Today on Jan 6)