Criticism of members of the elite umpires panel, Yahaluweni, is far from new.

There is rarely a Test series these days where there is no mumbling, grumbling and highly miffed players or by the media over decisions.

The higher profile the Test series, the more attention is paid to decisions made by the umpires and the on-field antics by the players. Controversy stirs the pot and grabs attention.

But when on glancing up at the TV screen on Saturday morning from reading the latest Sri Lanka batting debacle Down Under, what caught the attention was umpire Steve Bucknor's decision to signal the dismissal of young AB de Villiers. It has been called bizarre. Frankly, it is acutely reminiscent of playground cheating.

If there were doubts about Bucknor's credibility, which surfaced well before last year's World Cup final fiasco in the Caribbean, there is no doubt now that it's time he was honourably retired from the panel. The evidence of culpability was enough for even match referee Ranjan Madugalle to perhaps quietly whisper in the Jamaican's ear that it's time to quit.

But there he was quite happily signalling to De Villiers that he was out. And this after the ball, scuttling low, bounced twice before the batsman, attempting a wild pull, managed a top-edge and the bowler, Mohammad Ashraful to a return catch. Naturally, De Villiers waited for the umpire, Bucknor, to signal and call dead ball.

Imagine now, the row such a decision would have provoked had this been in a Test series involving Australia, India, England or even Sri Lanka. But it's only a Test between Bangladesh and South Africa, which means apart from low-key TV coverage, the media presence isn't as hyped as you would normally get.

Sure, there was some South African remonstration at the dismissal, but it had been made and now Bucknor, after the headline hype of the Sydney Test debacle seven weeks ago is back in the headlines, after being found out yet again.

Genuine errors can be accepted when these are rare, but a growing list of consistent mistakes displays a growing incompetence, and is a different story: it tells of an umpire whose eyesight and judgement has lost its sharpness, and confidence of the players at this level of the game.

It is like watching any classy batsman of five years earlier suddenly struggling with form and technique against quality bowling, yet reluctant to admit it is time to retire from such a highly competitive strata of the game. As the shadows of the sun lengthen, so do past memories of a quality player's performance; or pianist's delicate keyboard work, or violin or cello player's skill at handling the bow. The magic is gone.

Telltale signs are that the confident handwork and footwork are missing a beat; that hand-eye coordination misjudgement has become obvious, and are all part of the scenario. Ignoring the problem that age has opened up someone such as a player or umpire to making regular mistakes, is a dangerous tendency. It damages the credibility of a once proud reputation as well as his dignity.

Bucknor's error in Dhaka was not an elementary one. This comment was from a Bangladesh official attempting to divert the criticism the decision elicited and others further afield began to take an interest in the Jamaican umpire's fumbling performance. It was totally inept and is sad and disappointing to see.

It is now time for the ICC to pension off Bucknor before he makes further major fundamental errors and to give him the role of coaching future West Indian umpires.

As it is, former Indian Test captain and member of the elite panel, Srinivas Venktataraghavan, has along with Madugalle, David Lloyd and Dave Richardson been tasked to select future elite panels. Well, that is the word emerging from Dubai contacts.

What is worrying, and this is where the media need to take stock of their own voluble criticism, the elite panel could be seriously disrupted should Simon Taufel decide to quit at the end of next month. There are a few good umpires in the ICC international B panel, but added pressure makes even the better ones think twice about wanting to remain.

Introduced in April 2002, it has undergone a few radical changes, yet the monitoring process has not moved with the times as it should have done and only since Doug Cowie's appointment has there been an umpire who understands the demands required.

If Taufel decides to quit the panel and take up the Indian Premier League option to extend his career in the game, others are likely to follow. Whether there will be an auction of the umpires as there was on the players, is a tongue in cheek suggestion anyway.

Now, no one has to be a mathematics professor specialising in trigonometry to see certain flaws yet to advantages in a marketing a shorter CWC11.

But when it comes to the IPL and big spenders forking out all that moolah from which the players will benefit, there are certain advantages for the system as long as it works within the time limit planned for this type of game.

While glitz and showy glamour and Bollywood-style pinups may jazz up the façade of the IPL at the bidding of players for the franchises, and manoeuvre it in a new direction, the marketing of T-20 as a new generation fad needs to be carefully monitored by responsible administrators who are in it for the game and not the money.

This is one of the more important elements in the game's 21st century image with two major international competing formats that brings together a galaxy of top players, all bought for a price. The danger is overkill in an adrenalin-charged arena of one format against the other.

Jonty Rhodes in some ways welcomed the bidding arrangements, for despite its horse ring-cattle market image, players were at least getting paid money they deserve. His view was that Jacques Kallis is worth a million dollars and was short-changed. Okay, that's one view from a respected former star player.

Graeme Smith, maybe not with too much tongue in cheek, welcomed the idea of playing alongside Shane Warne. This shows just how much more rhetoric there is in Australian sledging than the critics of sledging are prepared to admit.

In many ways, it is fortunate that South Asian society is conservative and less outwardly brash than say the elements that have long infiltrated football where its mandarins with big corporate backing don't particularly care about the player element. It is all about team name branding and agents making fat, juicy profits through the skills of quality sportsmen.

It is also about how the yobbo elements achieving their adrenalin type kicks. It is not about sport, but a new form of the slave trade, ‘The Island’ headline also suggested last week.

Ultimately, major corporate marketing is the area where maybe the long-term future of the IPL franchise system lies. But it could also, if not controlled, come at a serious price to the game and its future. This is where administrators need to tread carefully in their marketing of the product.

Already it is not about the sport but the loot available from the TV deals and here, as with greedy politicians, there are those already climbing in with eyes on what they can make out of the companies involved in advertising. Kickbacks and other fancy tricks will be used to fatten bank accounts, in some cases in off-shore accounts.

If comments from Indian sources are accurate, it appears there are those who have already been seduced by the money available. The danger here is how the cartel type moguls, only interested in the money available, have taken control.

An examination since the 1970s shows how this has affected football's image in Europe and the British Isles. It created first a hysterical rivalry and culture that is evident on the terraces with its ugly intentions: thuggery and rolling brawling masses outside any number of venues; where the use of bad language and racist taunts and chants and xenophobia is encouraged.

It is an image that despite football's big drawing card allows for such practices where in some countries, no control to curb such racial intolerance is exercised. Football's international body doesn't as vigorously impose the anti-race card as does the ICC.

As for the Asia version of CWC11, the full member ICC nations chief executives knew changes had to be made to the format. After the often laborious and at one stage lugubrious event in the Caribbean, along with its farcical final, the game had to move with this new century. It needs a new image and this requires fancy marketing.

Although lessening the teams to fourteen and shortening the event by nine days, moves partly in that direction, logistics also play a role in keeping it still at least three days longer than is required. With both semi-finals played in two separate countries and the final in a third, travel arrangements and consideration of the fitness of the players involved need to be taken into consideration.

No matter how the event is marketed and stylised, the main concern should be about the players and the fatigue of too much air travel between countries. It is where the game's hierarchy needs to understand how to come up with a satisfactory format.

There were complaints of too much air travel during the West Indies event and some players were already fatigued by the time they reached the semi-finals. You cannot afford to have two tired teams playing.

As the late Bob Woolmer explained, it's not about fitness but about the continual changing of environments allied to other factors: accommodation, food and game schedules in an effort to maintain fitness levels.

This is where administrators need to seriously consider the burden placed on the players and their star attraction. Overloading the schedules of some countries is a problem. India and Sri Lanka are already faced with extra limited overs series against Pakistan this year.