Snicko is an important high-tech decision-making technology in cricket. It does an excellent job of helping to know if a batter actually hit the ball when under video review. Snicko English computer scientist Allan Plaskett originally developed Snicko in the mid-1990s. Since then, it’s turned into one of the most valuable tools for combating match-fixing and proving the need for catches in matches. This summer, its reliability, utility, and efficacy have all been called into question by players and broadcasters consistently and publicly.
The technology is estimated to cost £6,000 per day. This deployment has been during use for numerous international matches, including the 2013 Ashes series, where England sealed a 3-0 triumph. Although effective in its application, many faint edges were left undetected in those matches, calling into question the precision of the method. This imbalance of power has been exacerbated during the course of the 2013-14 Ashes series. This caused Australian broadcasters to dump Snicko as they questioned its trustworthiness and felt it was too costly.
Snicko works by picking up the sound waves that are produced by the ball hitting the bat. While the system does fire through the momentary spike that occurs after the ball goes by the bat, these borderline calls can create highly contested calls. Although still in use by television and radio networks in Australia and New Zealand, it is infrequently used internationally. Perhaps most ironically of all, is that Snicko can no longer be found in England’s Test matches.
Former England captain Michael Vaughan has been vocal in his disdain for Snicko. He argues that players have lost faith in the technology. He stated:
“It’s a shocker. It’s wrong. The players have lost trust in it.” – Michael Vaughan
Vaughan provided a withering critique of the system. He warned that financial limitations may affect the standard of technology employed across the game of cricket. He remarked:
“The ICC need to look at themselves in the mirror because who pays for this? The host broadcaster aren’t going to pay for the best technology, they pay so much for the rights. The home board aren’t going to pay for it.” – Michael Vaughan
Former Australian cricket team captain Ricky Ponting has agreed with the same when it comes to the reliability of Snicko. He highlighted that technology used in other countries is well and truly beyond what players and officials in Australia have access to. This technological gap is shocking.
“This technology that we are using here is simply not as good as technology that is used in other countries.” – Ricky Ponting
He further elaborated on the concerns voiced by umpires regarding Snicko’s effectiveness:
“You talk to the umpires, they’ll tell you the same thing. They can’t trust it.” – Ricky Ponting
The validity of Snicko has been a contentious issue in the cricket community. Former England bowler Alex Hartley just made it more interesting recently, calling for Snicko to be “sacked” in action.
Even though Snicko is a much cheaper alternative to UltraEdge, the other technology used in detecting edges, Snicko’s reliability is still often scrutinized. UK broadcaster Sky Sports eventually quit using Snicko in 2016. They decided to change it up because UltraEdge provided much better detail and accuracy.
Steve Crawley, a notable figure in sports broadcasting, acknowledged the criticisms surrounding Snicko and explained why they opted not to use it:
“We chose to use our money in other ways because of the criticisms of it.” – Steve Crawley
Is cricket changing, always innovating due to the power of technology? The Snicko debacle underscores the minefield that any system of decision-making now occupies in the current sporting landscape. Players, analysts, and fans alike have been calling for better technologies that allow for fairer, more accurate officiating.
Leave a Reply