IT IS AN admission of failure, but the case for
neutral umpires in Test matches now seems to me unanswerable. After one has made all the ritual Pious noises about the difficulties of an umpire's job and about how the man on the spot can see better than those eighty yards away, there seems no doubt that, the umpiring of McInnes, how- ever good it was four years ago, has not in the present series lent much comfort to those who believe that the umpire's decision is final. That engaging character Lindsay Hassett gallantly said earlier this week that he knows no better umpire in England or Australia than McInnes, though I should have thought it was a fairly elementary precaution for an umpire, not to turn his back on the runner, but the remarks of the cautious corre- spondents of The Times and Manchester Guar- dian leave no doubt that McInnes in this last Test match gave three 'not out' decisions which, though they may not have been insupportable, were in two cases at least not supported even by the batsmen concerned. The same thing has hap- pened, though less blatantly, in previous Tests, and the English captain has suggested that McInnes should be rested. Yet the Australians have continued to appoint him. The 'throwing' of Australian fast bowlers and their 'drag' is bound to be a fierce issue in the next Australian tour of England, and I think it is one that would be settled with less fuss if neutral umpires were used.
Previous page
