On Completing 40 years in OGs

On the eve of the 40th year of commissioning, I have to say this:
But for you kaminos of 54NDA/64 Reg what would I have been:
I would have been Bill Gates, but you stopped me saying that I don't have enough artificial intelligence;
I would have been Michael Jackson, but you stopped me saying that you are better off marching with ROPs than doing moonwalk;
I would have been a politician but you stopped me saying that achhe dinon ki talaash na karo, yehi hain achhe din.
But no regrets: thank you for making me an 'ornery no count puncher'.



Note: ROP-Road Opening Party

Runout, Stumping and LBW decision review in Test Cricket

In my view, Runouts, Stumpings and LBWs in Test cricket should have an automatic review by the third umpire. There should be no need for the batsman to ask for a review when declared out by the on-field umpire. In fact, the on-field umpires should have no role to play for Runouts, Stumpings and Runouts.
Why should there be an element of chance? It should never be such that a team has exhausted all its review options. As said earlier, it should be automatic.
Review options should only kick in for a contested catch, caught behind, bat and pad, etc.
Digressing slightly: why can't we have an electronic warning system for Noballs? As a bowler oversteps the crease (the crease should have an electronic pressure gauge), a beep loud enough for the umpire and the batsman to hear should go off. That way the umpire is liable only to call out the chucking action of the bowler and what happens after delivery. This will go a long way to relieve the umpires from making avoidable mistakes.
I think technology should help the game to become less and less chance dependant.