How to answer striker and scorer wisely ?

[Mayur Wankhade Deshmukh]

This is from my field experience and most likely to happen with any one or might have happened.

The striker was plumbed in front and there was loud shout for lbw... I dint had any doubt in my mind to negate LBW appeal except there was a bat before ball hit the pad or not... But as the ball is caught by short leg fielder before it grounds, with presence of mind i raised my fielder. But i was still not sure with the method dismissal.

Now here, if it did not hit the bat, then striker was LBW.
if it hit the bat, then he was caught.

Striker left the wicket... but i was still in doubt with method of dismissal... What to convey to scorer about it ? how to handle such situation wisely if batsman asks you about how you have given him out ??

[gooders]

In thee circumstances, I would hope that you would show confidence in your decision, and if the batsman queries your decision, your response would be "I based my decision on what I saw".

[jaybee]

We all know we should only give somebody out if we have no doubt. Here there is a doubt, but only about the way he was dismissed.
May I suggest:

1. You say nothing unless asked. The batsman may settle it for you by telling the scorer if he's asked and it doesn't matter to you which way he was out.
2. If you are asked you can say that he would have been plumb LBW but you thought he hit (or might have hit) the ball. Unless you were sure that the ball hit the pad first the benefit of the doubt means he's not LBW.
3. It then follows that he's out Caught.

I think it's a good general rule not to offer information unless asked and, where possible, to let the players think you agree with what they suggest as long as it fits in with your decision.

[missingleg]

Good advice there. You know it's out so you have to give it out. I've had this conversation before with a colleague who said he would give it not out based on the fact there was doubt either way, but I strongly disagreed with him.

[sillypoint]

Regarding this very scenario, I once heard an argument put that we should consider each decision independently, in which case you would say: "I'm not sure if he hit it, therefore it's not out caught; but he may have hit it, therefore it's not out LBW." This person was most vehement that you should therefore give the batsman not out. To me that is really a cop out because there is only one point of doubt in your mind, and either way it is resolved results in a dismissal. Thus, as far as I am concerned, double tick to Jaybee's thoughts on the matter. Couldn't have put it better.

[Mayur Wankhade Deshmukh]

Thanks everybody for your meaningful and valuable comments !

[Rob]

According to the laws of cricket, and all the training you receive, this is not out - but it is a very brave call!! If you do not know whether he is out caught - you shouldn't give him out. if you do not know whether he is out LBW - you shouldn't give him out.

You're very unlucky if this happens while you're umpiring - i hope it doesn't happen to me!!

[missingleg]

Hi Rob. I'm having difficulty finding where in the laws this is written. You're certainly unlucky if it happens - I can imagine the difficulty in the explanation to the fielding side! However, I can't find any evidence in laws or training to suggest you should give this not out when you know the batsman's out one way or another.

In fact, the only reference I can find to giving not-out to a decision where doubt remains (in the laws) is in the the issue of a catch carrying.

I see where you're coming from but I'd always give it out as it would be wrong & unjust not to (afterall, you know it's out!). For me, the batsman and scorers can deal with the matter of how it goes in the book.

[tippex2]

I agree you've got to give it out. To take another example, it would be ludicrous to say a batsman could survive because the umpire was unsure whether or not he was attempting a run, and therefore didn't know whether to give him out Stumped or Run Out.

[missingleg]

Excellent example tippex2. It's the same logic - I believe it's not right & fair to the fielding side, or the game, to reason that on appeal.

[sillypoint]

Rob makes the same argument I referred to in my earlier post ("If you do not know whether he is out caught - you shouldn't give him out. if you do not know whether he is out LBW - you shouldn't give him out.") This is an argument I reject. The only doubt in your mind in this instance is not whether the batsman is out or not, but how. Therefore the real dilemma facing an umpire confronted with this scenario is how to answer a question if it arises. Consider this:

(1) If you simply put your finger up and the batsman leaves, then it's easy. Nothing has been asked, so nothing need be said.
(2) Chances are, though, that someone—either as the batsman is leaving or soon afterwards—it could be the nonstriker, the bowler, the short leg fielder, will casually ask you: "Was that caught or LB, ump?" What are you going to say? I think I would say something like: "I am not sure whether the ball made contact with the bat; if it did, he was caught; if it didn't he was LBW. We had both better look in the scorebook later."
(3) If (2) does not happen you may be home free, as the scorebook will tell the story—probably the scorers will have asked the batsman him/herself.
(4) On the other hand, when you leave the ground the scorers might ask you how he was out (perhaps the batsman had answered their question with: "I don't know, ask the ump."). Again you would have to address the question. I think at that stage I would consider asking the batsman whether he thought he had nicked the ball. If he says yes, then say: "In that case you are out caught." (or vv if he says no).

[jaybee]

sillypoint: I go along with you on most of this though I'd prevaricate as long as I could.
If the fielder asks, you could always say "How did you read it?" and then when he plumps for one or the other you could reply that this was one of the options. It might also help you decide which way to go if the scorer asks you later.