Henry Blofeld: Time for ICC to bite bullet and sack incompetent umpires

There is still far too much incompetent umpiring in international cricket. At the highest level of the game the players have the right to expect a greater degree of efficiency from the game's top arbiters. It was wrongly thought that the introduction of the élite panel to take control of Test matches would be the answer.

It is abundantly clear that it is not and the subcommittee of the International Cricket Council, which appoints them, is not nearly tough enough. There is too much pussyfooting about of the you-scratch-my-back-and-I'll-scratch-yours variety by the powers-that-be.

The declared intention when the plan was originally mooted was to select the best eight umpires in the world, no matter where they came from. But this is where the ICC selectors have pulled their punches. They have not been dispassionate enough.

They have tried to spread their favours around as widely as possible within their original remit. The result has been that they have gone outside it. For example, there should never have been a place for Russell Tiffin, who has been over-rated as much as his fellow Zimbabwean, Ian Robinson, once was. Tiffin's performance in the recent Ashes series was appalling.

Asoka de Silva created all the right impressions early in his career. Recently, not least in the World Cup in South Africa, he failed to cut the mustard by some distance. David Orchard is another whose form has wavered increasingly. The ICC should act at once and give them the finger they themselves have been raising too indiscriminately in recent weeks.

It is almost always a sign of an umpire's decline into uncertainty that when he is confronted by those difficult decisions that are surrounded by doubt, that he decides to put up the finger rather than do what the Law tells him - which is to give the batsman the benefit of that doubt. The Law allows for uncertainty and, if umpires in doubt would only realise this, their decline would be less swift. A number of well-known umpires have made their names by saying not out. It is worth remembering that every cricketer is a batsman at some point.

With the ever-increasing amount of Test cricket being played, the original panel of eight élite umpires was never likely to be enough even before illness or injury is taken into account. Three more names have been added, but this should not be allowed to help. It is clear three of the existing panel of eight are not good enough.

In the first few months of this year Tiffin, De Silva and Orchard have been found wanting. Tiffin and Orchard have only been given one-year contracts as opposed to the normal two, which amounts to a whacking big 'L' plate being tied to the backs of their coats. The three additional names are Darrell Hair, Simon Taufel and Billy Bowden. Hair is fearless. When England were in the West Indies in 1997-98, he did his best to stop futile and boring pad play by giving a few West Indians out when they took it to absurdity. He has not left anyone in doubt either as to his views about Muttiah Muralitharan's action - which has not made him everyone's friend - for he has called him for throwing.

Even if that direct line of action has been effectively closed to umpires - it is now done behind the scenes - Test cricket will be the better for Hair's forthright presence. The other two have earned their promotion too. There were definite signs in the World Cup that Bowden is now toning down his most histrionic of signals. Even so, when signalling a six, he still acts a little as if Covent Garden Opera House and not Lord's should be his natural home.

It is now important that these three should take the places of the three who have had the chance and failed to deliver. Cricket's usual reaction is to want to give them at least one more chance. This would be nonsense for matches could be distorted and young players' careers terminally damaged. The paymasters at the ICC must bite the bullet, pay off the three contracts in full and wish them well.

Then the authorities must make strenuous efforts to utilise the electronic evidence that has been proved to be foolproof and will save umpires from being made to look stupid. When Orchard gave the Zimbabwean opener, Don Ebrahim, out lbw in the first innings at the Riverside on Friday, a quick look at the replay by the third umpire, which should be compulsory, would have made it clear that the ball had hit the inside edge of the bat. Ebrahim should have been recalled and the delay would have been minimal.

Electronics are probably not all as foolproof as their inventors and protagonists would have us believe. But if HawkEye and the Snickometer can be shown to be 100 per cent foolproof, then we should not be squeamish about them.

Umpiring is an increasingly impossible job and those who control the game must do everything within their power to help make it as exact a science as possible.