|
|
Post by mattd18 on Aug 6, 2006 22:07:11 GMT
I am umpiring today and the batsman got caught down at fine leg. In my opinion the ball was hit inbetween waist and shoulder height and was a full toss. The keeper was standing up and I did not feel the bowler was a fast bowler. Therefore I deemed it to be a legitimate delivery and the batsman was out. I thought nothing more of it until the incoming batsman moaned about the decision. Is this correct? BTW The batsman that was out had ran me out for 0 earlier in the innings!  |
|
|
|
Post by B A JAMULLA on Aug 7, 2006 5:58:15 GMT
Correct decision
Jamula- India
|
|
|
|
Post by wisden17 on Aug 7, 2006 17:39:41 GMT
Just one thing, Law 42 refers to the speed of delivery of the ball, not to the type of bowler (thus a 'quick' bowler may bowl and slow delivery and vice versa). Just because the keeper is standing up does not mean that the delivery cannot be judged as fast. The definitions of fast and slow are relative to the game (and many competitions now have special playing regulations which make any ball above waist height a no ball).
|
|
|
|
Post by swerveman on Aug 7, 2006 21:29:10 GMT
It would be interesting to know how Law 42.6b is interpreted in other places. I believe in New Zealand, for example, a full toss of any speed above waist height is penalised.
|
|
|
|
Post by wisden17 on Aug 8, 2006 20:35:49 GMT
Ah well that's special playing conditions overriding the law of cricket, as the ECB do, and number of English Leagues. Law 42 is quite clear (and Don Oslear explains the reasoning behind why the distinction was made between a slow and fast delivery, as I'm guessing many of you will not know why the difference was chosen). The thinking (apparently) behind the difference is that a slow delivery might hit the batsman above waist height but it mya be dropping, and so the batsman could be liable to being out LBW (sort of Jim Laker style bowling, if you know what I mean), and if the laws had made all fo those deliveries No-Balls, then the chance of a LBW would not be there. How many LBWs have been given where the batsman has been hit by the ball above waist height (standin upright at the crease) would be an interesting thing to know.
|
|
|
|
Post by Acumen on Aug 9, 2006 16:44:18 GMT
I had a beamer a couple of weeks ago. The bowler had been somewhat wayward and was of medium speed. The batsman leaned away in anticipation and I called No Ball very promptly as it was clear that it would pass above his waist - at his facing side (although probably below his waist at the far side). There was a little good-hearted consternation on all sides when it clipped the bails!
|
|
|
|
Post by swerveman on Aug 10, 2006 21:37:37 GMT
Law 42 is quite clear (and Don Oslear explains the reasoning behind why the distinction was made between a slow and fast delivery, as I'm guessing many of you will not know why the difference was chosen). Don Oslear also states "When I umpire, I shall only allow a delivery a little faster than stationary. If quicker, I shall call and signal "no ball", should it pass or would have passed above waist height of the striker." Maybe he's a closet Kiwi! ;D |
|
|
|
Post by wisden17 on Aug 11, 2006 0:51:14 GMT
Yes, Don does make it quite clear that he was out-voted regarding this particular Law, and so I'm sure he's happy when he sees so many playing regualtions nowadays which state that any ball above waist height, regardless of speed, shall be called and signalled a no ball.
|
|
|
|
Post by Peter Gillman on Aug 11, 2006 15:54:07 GMT
I have two experiences to relate in this connection. I have just started umpiring in a home counties league but last month umpired a Cornish (4th division) match. A young fast bowler sent down a beamer which I called no ball, and then told him that I had to give him a warning. I also spoke to the captain, who remonstrated with me along the lines that he was a young bowler, I shouldn't be affecting his confidence in that way, this was 4th division cricket etc. I said (remembering Tom Smith) that I had no discretion over this and that the point of the law was to protect batsmen from injury, irrespective of the bowler's capabilities. The captain (a disgruntled sort, who queried other of my decisions, including when I no-balled him for the back foot) seemed barely satisfied.
I felt that I handled that properly but got my come-uppance when standing at home last week. A slow bowler bowled a ball above waist-height which the home team batsman skied and was caught. There was some commotion over this and only later did I realise (or remember) that the rules of the competition differed from the MCC Laws - ALL balls above waist-height, slow or fast, should be called. I felt wretched about this as I should obviously have known.
I also wished my fellow umpire - who knew the competition rules - had intervened, but I can see it would have been difficult for him. He said later that I would not make that mistake again which is a modicum of consolation. I apologised to the captain and batsman in the bar afterwards and they were quite generous about it. I know that we are supposed to learn from our mistakes in this early period but it was a painful lesson.
|
|
|
|
Post by wisden17 on Aug 11, 2006 16:33:07 GMT
Making any mistake when umpiring can be upsetting, but obviously when it one based on ignorance of laws or of playing conditions it can be doubly so. I wouldn't worry about it though, you've clearly learnt from your mistake and it should make you think about a number of things: to perhpas re-read playing conditions for the match the night before, just to remind yourself of any differences for each particular game (only takes 5 minutes, but can be very valueable); also you may want to have a discussion with your colleague before the game to mention that you would like him to signal if he feels it is a no ball when standing at square leg (obviously this wouldn't have helped in this circumstance).
|
|
|
|
Post by mrsinghIndia on Aug 16, 2006 19:15:49 GMT
I'm all for Laws that are easy for the umpire in the middle to apply.
The present set of regulations of different hieghts, the indefinable terms such as 'slow', 'fast', 'striker standing upright', 'at the crease'. All of which are difficult of application and 9 times out of 10 (Is that unreasonable?) TV catches out the poor umpire.
Hurray for the lawmakers in New Zealand! They have their heads screwed on the right way.
There is a suggestion to legislate that any full toss of any speed above stump height be adjudged a 'no ball'. Howsthat? Any responses to that?
|
|
|
|
Post by johnfgolding on Aug 25, 2006 18:14:48 GMT
I had a beamer a couple of weeks ago. The bowler had been somewhat wayward and was of medium speed. The batsman leaned away in anticipation and I called No Ball very promptly as it was clear that it would pass above his waist - at his facing side (although probably below his waist at the far side). There was a little good-hearted consternation on all sides when it clipped the bails! I must admit I have had this happen to me twice this season. Whilst at the srtikers end a ball has passed over waist (not being, in my opinion a slow ball) and hit the stumps. I firmly believe that we need to be mindful of the batsmans capabilities as well. In the lower leagues I umpire in I (this is assuming my partner agrees) tell both the captains that I will call anything over waist height (batsman standing upright at the crease). |
|
|
|
Post by cheltump on Aug 25, 2006 19:05:23 GMT
Whilst I can see the point of calling any fullpitch over waist high a no ball, you can't decide to alter the Laws on a whim. How would you justify your actions to a slow bowler who complained about you to the governing body? Umpires are there to control the game according to the Laws, not to invent new laws.
|
|
|
|
Post by johnfgolding on Aug 28, 2006 11:44:36 GMT
Law 42 is quite clear (and Don Oslear explains the reasoning behind why the distinction was made between a slow and fast delivery, as I'm guessing many of you will not know why the difference was chosen). Don Oslear also states "When I umpire, I shall only allow a delivery a little faster than stationary. If quicker, I shall call and signal "no ball", should it pass or would have passed above waist height of the striker." Maybe he's a closet Kiwi! ;D This posting seems to agree with me. I am not intending to make up or alter the laws, but I would be more concerned about facing litigation (whether I was insured or not) for a claim for injury than facing the governing body. I can say the "In my opinion ..............". I think common sense prevails and the agreement of both teams (ie their Captains alwaysought). It is worth noting that I have never had a captain or collegue disagree with me. |
|
|
|
Post by layman umpire on Jun 15, 2008 11:06:49 GMT
I have read all the comments on this situation as it has just happened in a match i was playing in. The question i want to put is:- Is it the duty of the bowlers end umpire to call such a delivery 'No ball' or is it the square leg umpire?
Both teams had differing ideas on this.
|
|
