[jambutty]

So England won the second test against New Zealand but like in the first test the contentious LBW law played its part.

I’m the first to accept that the test umpires are very good at their job and try to be as fair as possible in making their decisions, but umpires are human beings and human beings make mistakes. None more so when adjudicating on an LBW decision.

Time and time again Hawkeye has shown that the umpire got it wrong and a batsman was given “Not Out” when Hawkeye clearly showed that he should have been. Or vice versa.

The difference between the ball hitting the stumps and just missing them can be measured in microns. If the ball just misses the leg stump of a right handed batsman by the narrowest of margins it means that if the ball was just a few microns to the left of its path it would have hit the leg peg.

I defy any human being to differentiate to that degree of accuracy from close up especially when the umpire’s vision is blocked by the batsman, let alone from 22 yards.

Thus I feel that Hawkeye should be used to adjudicate on LBW appeals.

After all the precedent has already been set with using technology in the form of TV replays to determine whether a batsman was run out or not and even if a catch was legal or not. Not forgetting if the fielder did stop the ball from crossing the boundary rope.

But those old fuddy duddies at Lords would have an apoplectic fit if they joined the 21st century so it is unlikely to happen.