This entry is now closed for comments.
There is absolutely no need or excuse for a slow bowler to be pushing the line, so perhaps it would help with some of the closer calls (although most of them were blatant in this Test) if the law were changed to insist on part of the foot being grounded behind the line.
The ICC have it in their power improve things without handing over even more control to the TV companies - substandard umpires simply need to be removed from the elite panel.It isn't just no-balls that aren't being called by these guys; they are also consistently making an unacceptably high number of obviously bad judgments on LBW & caught decisions.
The power of tradition, and the perceived need to keep umpires motivated by not diminishing their status, is understandable but there's no logic in leaving any on-field decisions to umpires IF technology is more accurate than the human eye . (It's not whether technology is infallible, but whether it's less fallible than human decision making.) However, logic and tradition rarely mix.
A couple of seasons ago I was in the Mound Stand at Lord's for a county match. Good sideways on view. Bowler overstepped, therefore no ball. Umpire did not call no ball. We all saw it. Batsman out (can't remember how, now). We all shouted "Not Out, No Ball" plus remarks about "Specsavers". Umpire removed to Square Leg, we continued to shout "Not Out". Umpire heard us, but ignored us
buttler struggles to give himself out when he should walk. this talk of him becoming an umpire is crazy - he would never give anyone out. focus on your own cricket buttler, umpire's job is very different.
Umpires now stand so far back, they are unable to pick up no balls. Easy solution; revert to back foot rule. Part of back foot behind wicket line being easier to see and after the call, more time for a free hit.
Umpires are bound to make some mistakes on marginal no balls with parallax problems I guess but it's not a big deal to watch the line and then flick your eyes up to track the ball. No need to change I suggest. I don't agree with the 'free hit' idea either but maybe deal with it similarly to running in the danger area. Do it too often and you're off for the innings.
No 84, irony, isn’t that something you play golf with? 😀
I don't see anything wrong with an umpire warning a bowler about getting too close. Next offence; calling 'no ball,' 1, Extra to the total. Second offence 2 Extras to the total, and so on. Plus the extra legal delivery. That should sort it. If they can see the no ball in the first place.
Sorry Shepherd cost us a test match against Pakistan Akram took 4 wickets with no balls it was a nightmare which he publicly admitted some time afterwards. For me should be third umpire on field umpire communication.
Having umpired a bit at club level, spotting a no ball is probably the easiest job for an umpire at any level. It is an obvious black/white decision.If Test match umpires can't do it, then they shouldn't be test match umpires.
Before long we could also dispense with players and replace them with technology, and play the game purely by computer.It wouldn't make much difference anyway as most people can only follow the cricket by reading about it on the internet.
We're having some problems displaying the comments at the moment. Sorry. We're doing our best to fix it.
You must sign in to rate comments