It had to come and cricket should be better for it.

That has to be the view now that the International Cricket Council has approved the experimental introduction of unrestricted access by the third umpire to video replay at the Champions Trophy in Sri Lanka this September.

In striking the balance between retaining the highly personal authority of the umpires on the pitch and the all-seeing eyes of the cameras and their video replays, the ICC has drawn up a series of sensible regulations.

The third umpire must wait to be consulted - as at present.

And for decisions beyond run-outs and stumpings, he must make his decision on the basis of just two glimpses of the action.

It will not and they should not. What we have here is a formula for speedy and authoritative justice, with the umpires' authority enhanced, not diminished, by technology.

Naturally enough, former Test umpire Dickie Bird does not like it.

He was never a fan of the third umpire and his limited role in the first place now he likes it even less.

"The umpire as we knew him is finished" he says.

Only in one respect. The umpire retains all his qualities, his good faith, his skill, his perception and his impartiality. Only his fallibility is going.

Dickie Bird was a glorious showman on the field and was loved for it by the public, but the fundamental role of the umpire is low-key and unobtrusive, to serve the players - the real stars - with correct decisions as quickly and efficiently as possible.

This experiment simply lends the umpire an extra pair of eyes with the 20/20 vision of hindsight. Why reject it?

The players have a responsibility here to keep their side of the bargain.

They like the video replay because it has gone some way - and could go further - in removing the arbitrary nature of faulty decisions which can conceivably affect careers.

But they must approach this experiment in a spirit of co-operation, not exploitation. Football-style hectoring and badgering of officials just will not do.