It is not a new thing tosay that bad decisions given by umpires have changed the results. I READ IN CRICINFO COLUMN that Simon Taufel and Aleem Darr perosnally have mentioned about the wrong decisions given by them and how that affected the century score of a player who could not complete his century and the fate ofrecent india -england one day series in the Aleemdarr case.Whatever cricket experts say people are passionate about their country winning and are atleast united and patriotic in ,the sports.I don,t say that umpires shoud give decisions in the favour of host country.But they should give correct decisions and if they have a doubt they can use third umpire.Otherwise what for the third umpire is there? Is he there only to receive medallion at the end of series? I saw the recent Australia-sri lanka match.One run outwas not given.That is a correct decision confirmed by third umpire.But the Aussie commentators saw that replay atleast 5 times and still they were not happy with the third umpire decision as understood from their commentary.Aleem Dar says that hefelt very bad for giving Tendlkar out in the natwest series and it costed us the series.Cricket is for public entertainment and not for hurting their feelings.One man,s poor decision shoud not takeaway the enjoymentof millions.Added to this the player is fined for telling the truth.This is against natural justice.Who is at fault?Is it the umpire or the player?No law also supports the fact that the person who appe
