Australia v New Zealand: Nathan Lyon’s DRS escape showcases danger of technology

A BAD verdict by a Test cricket umpire at the weekend showcases the grave dangers of the modern game, Robert Craddock writes.

Australia's Nathan Lyon, right, attempts a sweep in front of New Zealand's BJ Watling during their cricket test in Adelaide, Australia, Saturday, Nov. 28, 2015. This match is the sport's first ever day-night test. (AP Photo/Rick Rycroft)

THE trouble with replacing men with machines is that they start acting the same.

The cringingly bad “not out’’ verdict over Nathan Lyon’s blatant edge on Saturday showcased the grave dangers in letting technology hold sway over common sense.

It’s always a dreadful event for cricket when an umpire ruins a Test.

Third umpire Nigel Llong, sounding much like a panic-stricken 90-year-old man searching for his reading glasses, gave Lyon not out when Hot Spot clearly showed he hit the ball.

Has there ever been a more ridiculous comment from a third umpire than Llong’s assertion that the hot spot “could have come from anywhere?’’

The exact opposite was true.

It could only have come from the ball hitting the bat.

Before their instincts were dulled by technology, many of the game’s best umpires were acutely aware of subtle messages that helped them get the decision right.

Nathan Lyon proved a thorn in New Zealand’s side after his DRS escape. Picture: Sarah Reed

Things like body language, the strength of the appeal and who actually appealed all got fed into the computer that is the human brain in the few seconds before they were required to spit out a decision.

They reckoned if Mark Waugh appealed with gusto it was generally out.

Strangely enough, when commentators pointed out that Lyon had walked to the boundary as he waited for the decision – a dead giveaway to the fact he knew he was out – my mind drifted to former top umpires like Mel Johnson.

Had Mel, all common sense and with a solid grasp of everything happening around him, been the middle you could just imagine him sorting things out in a heartbeat.

You could almost hear no-nonsense Mel saying on the two-way to Llong; “mate, I have got a bit of news for you ... Lyon’s walked off ... I stuffed up ... he’s obviously out ... just call it out and we will sort out the paperwork later.’’

But umpire S Ravi was never going to do this.

Firstly because he did not want to concede his own error. And secondly there was that dreaded issue called protocol.

Umpires are not supposed to report things like batsmen’s body language because they are not considered part of the black and white evidence scrutinised in the decision making process.

New Zealand players were not impressed after Nathan Lyon was given not out. Picture: Sarah Reed

Yet Lyon’s walk-off was as close to categorical proof as you could get that he was out.

It was disturbing to hear ICC chief executive Dave Richardson tell The Courier-Mail from Dubai that he felt correct protocol was followed in the decision.

There’s the worry right there.

Every decision made in Tests is reviewed by an ICC panel and there is no guarantee that the Lyon decision will be marked as mistake.

The panel may find that because the edge did not register on the snickometer there was enough doubt to stay with the original call of not out.

The decision marred the Test match but there was still much to like about the first day-night Test.

The excellent Adelaide Oval wicket should be a template for more of the same around the cricket world.

All forms of the game see quite enough of batsmen hitting the ball out of the park.

The game needs more red hot contests between bat and ball.

This was a game where you dare not walk away from the television for any length of time.

Curators need to be brave and leave more grass on wickets.

Even despite the DRS howler it’s been a massive few days for the game.