Hesson and NZ skipper Brendon McCullum want their side to move on from umpire Richard Illingworth’s gaffe in the first trans-Tasman Test, which Australia won by a thumping innings and 52 runs.
The Blacks Caps were dudded by a pivotal no-ball call in the last over of day one.
Adam Voges was on seven when he shouldered arms and was bowled by Doug Bracewell, only for Illingworth to incorrectly signal no-ball.
Replays confirmed Bracewell had part of his foot behind the line, while Voges went on to score 239 and be named man of the match.
Hesson noted there was no point complaining or contacting the International Cricket Council regarding the specific decision.
But he agreed with McCullum’s suggestion that more could be done regarding the issue, which crops up incredibly rarely at the highest level.
“The more decisions right the better,” Hesson said.
“Players, spectators, coaches just want as many correct decisions made as possible. If that’s going from 85 to 95 [per cent] so be it.
“If we can use more technology to do that then decisions like that become less influential.
“It’s something the ICC are aware of and will be discussed.”
Indeed, on-field no-ball calls will again be on the agenda at the ICC’s next meeting after the controversial call.
“The ICC Cricket Committee will be discussing the use of technology at its next meeting, and the topic of reviewing no-balls will again be part of that discussion,” an ICC spokesman told Fairfax Media.
“The ICC Cricket Committee has discussed this issue on a number of occasions and come to the same conclusion each time – it is not right that a batsman plays a delivery that is illegal, only to be told retrospectively that it was legal and that he is out by a mode of dismissal that would not have been allowed from an illegal delivery.”
The ICC did, however, defend their current system, which does not allow for no-ball calls to be overturned after a batsman is dismissed.
Handing the responsibility of calling bowlers for overstepping to the third umpire is one solution but footage of 50-50 calls is often inconclusive.
Former umpire Simon Taufel presented a report on technology designed to allow third umpires to monitor no-balls earlier this summer, impressing the World Cricket Committee – a think tank funded by the Marylebone Cricket Club.
Even if the ICC’s cricket committee are satisfied the technology is up to scratch and agree in principle to change it will be incredibly hard to implement.
Funding looms as a major issue.
The ICC currently relies on host TV broadcasters to provide and pay for the technology required for the Decision Review System.
India’s reluctance when it comes to technology will also be a roadblock.
“We’re kidding ourselves if we ever think we’ll get a 100 per cent proof system no matter what it is. That’s the nature of the game we play,” Hesson said.
Hesson admitted his side was disappointed about the howler but moved on “pretty quickly”.
“Every decision has an impact on the game, some more than others,” he said.
“We discussed with [match referee] Chris Broad after the game, as you do, but it became apparent very quickly there’s not a lot that can be done about it.
“We move on.”
Meanwhile, Broad noted Illingworth was upset about the howler.
“Richard was distraught afterwards when he realised that it wasn’t a no-ball,” Broad told News Corp Australia.
“It’s clearly embarrassing at the time.
“Richard is a Yorkshireman, he shrugs his shoulders and gets on with it. I’m constantly amazed at how the umpires, when they do make their occasional errors, are able to recover from it.”
Illingworth will not stand as an on-field umpire in the next Test, but will be a third umpire, as per the appointments made prior to the series.
Local News Matters
Media diversity is under threat in Australia – nowhere more so than in South Australia. The state needs more than one voice to guide it forward and you can help with a donation of any size to InDaily. Your contribution goes directly to helping our journalists uncover the facts. Please click below to contribute to InDaily.