|
|
Post by missingleg on Apr 12, 2014 18:34:43 GMT
Hi all; just after some views on how you would deal with this situation:
This slow bowler has a very narrow follow-through and as such his body obscures the path of the ball (his follow through isn't long enough to take him into the protected area but he finishes in front of your line of sight. You cannot see the ball when it reaches the batsman. As such, you politely point out to the bowler that although he's doing nothing wrong (in terms of the laws) you won't be able to adjudicate on lbw or caught behaind decisions if you can't see the ball!
But, what if this bowler bowls deliveries which pass wide, or very wide, of the striker. Do you call wide ball based on your not being able to see it? Do you not call wide ball and risk penalising the batsman for you not being able to see the ball. What if that makes you fail to call wide to a ball delivered outside the return crease? Conversely, what if you guess a wide despite the ball not being very wide of the striker.
In short, what would you do if you can't see the ball at any point as it passes the striker and the bowler doesn't change his (legal) follow through?
|
|
|
|
Post by sillypoint on Apr 12, 2014 23:58:55 GMT
I think you must adjust your own stance to make every effort to be able to see the ball, since you ability to carry out your role depends on it. In my experience, moving closer to the stumps helps you to see the ball in these circumstances, as this effectively elevates your line of sight.
If the bowler persists in blocking your view, you need to keep reminding him that this will make it impossible for him to achieve a successful appeal for anything requiring your judgement of actions close to the wicket within the area he is obscuring. (Then you just hope the opportunity comes along for you to deny him a wicket because of this—nothing would be more likely to make him change his behaviour!)
I guess if it is really bad and you can find no way of getting around it I guess there are a couple of other more drastic things you could try:
(1) stand as far to one side as you have to to be able to see past the bowler (ref Law 3.10), even though you will then not be able to judge LBW, and your judgement on other matters may be compromised; before doing this I would call the bowler and his captain together (and your colleague too, perhaps), explain what you are going to do and why—that in spite of constant requests the blower has not changed his ways, and that you have tried several other position adjustments but been unable to find one that overcomes the problem, and explain that your judgement on some matters will be compromised and that in particular all LBW appeals will be answered not out.
(2) another alternative could be to explain to the captain and bowler that you consider his action in totally blocking your view to be unfair (Law 42.2), and that each time he does it you will simply call dead ball and the ball will have to be rebowled. Furthermore, if the behaviour continues with any frequency you will consider it to be deliberate time wasting and point out that this could lead to the bowler being suspended (ref Law 42.9).
Having said all that, though, I reiterate that either of the above actions are just tools to have in your kit to deal with total noncooperation by the bowler. In the first instance you must make every effort to adjust your own position to enable you to see the ball. If necessary you can stand directly behind the stumps, or on tip toes, but you must try everything YOU can before either of the above are tried.
|
|
|
|
Post by missingleg on Apr 13, 2014 9:19:03 GMT
Interesting points, sillypoint. I'm intrigued by the idea of standing to the side of the stumps in this instance. It's very difficult because the bowler isn't technically doing anything wrong. I never like standing right up to the stumps owing to the significant head movement required in looking for foot fault no balls (and the danger of being hit in the head from a drive!) but this situation may call for drastic measures.
Would you call wides for each occassion you cannot see the ball pass the striker as an additional means of getting your point accross?
|
|
|
|
Post by sillypoint on Apr 13, 2014 14:32:17 GMT
As regards calling a wide simply to make a point, no I would not. My strategy is based on fulfilling my role according to the Laws—"to stand where he can best see any act upon which his decision may be required" (Law 2.10) In normal circumstances the best position is directly in line behind the bowler's end wicket. If a particular bowler is making it impossible for me to see the action at the striker's end, and I cannot overcome the problem by standing in a different position while still in line, you could consider moving sideways a little—you may only need to move a foot or two to be able to see past the bowler. As already noted in my previous post, obviously this would compromise your ability to judge some actions so you would only take such action after clearly informing the fielding captain of what you are doing, and why, and the implications of the action. The aim, of course, is to give further encouragement to the bowler to change his ways, and hopefully his captain will assist in this when he understands the situation you are dealing with.
|
|
|
|
Post by tippex2 on Apr 14, 2014 8:57:22 GMT
Especially as it's a slow bowler, I cant see anything wrong with standing in a normal position, and moving after the ball's delivered if you can tell that it's going to be blocked - I'm quite tall so a lean to one side is often enough, although I appreciate this won't work for everyone.
Agree that I certainly wouldn't start calling everything wide "to get the point across" - you really should be able to make your point by having a quick chat with the bowler / captain. In any case, if you start calling everything you can't see as wide, you're essentially guessing as to where each individual delivery passed the batsman - never a good place to get into.
|
|
|
|
Post by jaybee on Apr 14, 2014 20:24:09 GMT
...Agree that I certainly wouldn't start calling everything wide "to get the point across" .... If you did that you might have to retract your call if the batsman hit it - and then you'd be the one who'd look foolish. You certainly need to make the point that you can't see and, if it doesn't improve, I think it's essential that you tell the fielding captain as well as the bowler. Several seasons ago I had an extreme example of this and subsequently moved to the side as soon as the bowler obstructed my field of view. It still wasn't enough for me to see the ball strike the batsman's pads (which allegedly happened) and if I had I'd still have been guessing - but at least it allowed me a chance of seeing some of the action. Having forewarned the skipper I was in the clear and any comback was between him and the (young and inexperienced) bowler. |
|
|
|
Post by gooders on Apr 14, 2014 21:20:15 GMT
I'm surprised that a word with the bowler doesn't have the desired effect.
Usually telling them that they make a better door than a window makes them think about the cost should they hit the pads.
I say that, because as we all know, every time it hits the pads, even deep square leg thinks it's out L.B.W.
|
|
|
|
Post by sillypoint on Apr 15, 2014 5:22:11 GMT
Three points in response:
1. re comment by tippex2: if you are going to move to one side anyway I can't see that you gain anything by waiting until after the ball has been delivered. Once the ball leaves the bowler's hand your eyes should be picking up and then tracking the ball in the air; to do that successfully you need to be stationary and also keeping your head still, moving only your eyes.
2. re guessing wides: I hope my previous post make clear I am totally opposed to guessing—that way lies trouble!
3. Finally, I have never had to resort to either of the more drastic courses I described—but it helps to have something in mind in case your efforts are met with complete intransigence from a bowler. My experience is that (1) you can almost always find a position from which you can see, and (2) bowlers are usually persuaded to try and clear your view by the suggestion that they will not get an lbw. I usually say something like: "I hope you don't plan to appeal if he is hit on the pads or nicks one; I won't be able to give him out if I can't see past you."
|
|
|
|
Post by missingleg on Apr 15, 2014 7:57:21 GMT
...if you start calling everything you can't see as wide, you're essentially guessing as to where each individual delivery passed the batsman - never a good place to get into. Although I'm not suggesting that this is a good practice, you would essentially have to guess one way or another as you don't know where it's passed (in an extreme circumstance it could be anywhere from 2 feet from the stumps to outside the return crease for all you know!). In this instance, you'd be penalising the batsman for not calling a wide that should have been called because you don't know & therefore can't guess. It's a bad situation but you have to make a judgement - would you be inclined to favour the batsman so as not to penalise him? |
|
|
|
Post by sillypoint on Apr 15, 2014 11:12:28 GMT
Rather than guess, if you have reason to suspect that the delivery was wide you would be better to call Dead Ball on the basis that it is unfair to the batting side that you cannot see what has taken place as a result of an action by the bowler, and rebowl the delivery (refs 42.2 and 23.6.a.i). But note that I am not suggesting you would do so merely because you couldn't see the delivery—after all, the striker may have nicked it, in which case you would answer not out to any appeal, because you were unsighted, AND announce loudly that that is why you have given the decision! I would suggest only calling unfair play if you have reason to suspect (eg. from the reaction of the players) that something that disadvantages the batting side has occurred.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mayur Wankhade Deshmukh on Apr 16, 2014 6:22:46 GMT
Old method of bending forward and resting hands on the knees may be helpful here. In this case there will be no need to change the position from behind the wicket. One can try out this option too to see the ball with respect to LBWs. I guess this old method of standing behind the wicket gives more accuracy for "wickets hitting" point with respect to LBWs.
|
|
|
|
Post by sillypoint on Apr 16, 2014 7:16:26 GMT
What is the point of bending forward? To peer through between the bowler's legs? To properly judge the flight of the ball you need to keep your head still and track the ball with your eyes.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mayur Wankhade Deshmukh on Apr 24, 2014 10:02:37 GMT
@ sillypoint : Agreed with you  That was just a way round suggested by me that too to try out if its making things possible for some of the verdicts when bowlers hands or other parts of body blocking the views. that was not perfect solution but just asked to be tried. |
|
That was just a way round suggested by me that too to try out if its making things possible for some of the verdicts when bowlers hands or other parts of body blocking the views. that was not perfect solution but just asked to be tried.