Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread: LBW law

  1. #1
    Request Your Custom Title Now! Mr Mxyzptlk's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Trinidad and Tobago (Trinidad)
    Posts
    36,795

    LBW law

    Recently there have been a few poor umpiring decisions regarding inside edges and lbw.

    Here is my opinion. If a player gets an inside edge and it hits the wicket, then hes out no question (barring noball)
    Therefore if LBW is the obstruction of the ball hitting the wicket providing it has picthed in line with leg, then why not, if in the opinion of the umpire (as with regular LBW) the ball will hit the stumps off the inside edge, shouldn't it be given out? The ball is being obstructed by the pad. If it had missed the pad, he would've been out bowled.

    This will allow the bowlers to get back into what is becoming more and more a batsman's game and make cricket more competitive as a result.
    Sreesanth said, "Next ball he was beaten and I said, 'is this the King Charles Lara? Who is this impostor, moving around nervously? I should have kept my mouth shut for the next ball - mind you, it was a length ball - Lara just pulled it over the church beyond the boundary! He is a true legend."


  2. #2
    State 12th Man
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Vancouver, Canada
    Posts
    787
    Thats a good point, but then the same thing applies to the LBW appeal being denied on deliveries pitched outside leg stump. The ball if not hit the pads would have hit wickets.

  3. #3
    Eyes not spreadsheets marc71178's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    England
    Posts
    57,587
    They're both wildly different scenarios IMO, but it'd certainly make the game a lot different if outside leg were allowed for LBW!

    Inside edge would remove a lot of controversy, but Cricket for me thrives on that.
    marc71178 - President and founding member of AAAS - we don't only appreciate when he does well, but also when he's not quite so good!

    Anyone want to join the Society?

    Beware the evils of Kit-Kats - they're immoral apparently.

  4. #4
    Cricket Web: All-Time Legend Top_Cat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Adelaide, South Australia
    Posts
    23,066
    Just think about how many LBW decisons will go the bowler's way if that were the case. It would turn the game into a farce.

    Besides, the LBW law's intention isn't just to prevent batsmen from using their pads full stop; it's to stop batsmen from using their pads as a primary defence and just padding the ball away. Back in the old days, it was a real problem i.e. it was almost impossible to get batsmen out. So the law was invented to prevent batsmen from just putting their legs in front and if they missed it and were in front, they'dbe given out.

    If you get an inside edge, the presumption is that you're trying to play at the ball so shouldn't be given out.
    The Colourphonics

    Bandcamp
    Twitderp


  5. #5
    State Vice-Captain The Argonaut's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Brisbane Australia
    Posts
    1,351
    I concur with Top Cat.

  6. #6
    State 12th Man
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Vancouver, Canada
    Posts
    787
    Nope Marc, I think the same reasoning applies to both scenarios, and if one was allowed the other would have to be allowed using the same logical reasoning i.e. ball going into the wkts is stopped by the pads, hence batsman needs to be penalized.

    Hence as TC said, it would shift the balance heavily in favour of the bowler and is not desirable and its too radical, the whole dynaics of the game change. Spinners will especially be bowling into the bowlers rough all the time, hoping to get an LBW.


  7. #7
    Eyes not spreadsheets marc71178's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    England
    Posts
    57,587
    At the moment, if the inside edge is taken, it is in paying a shot. Mot balls hitting the pad after pitching outside leg are with no attempt at a shot - that was my reasoning.

  8. #8
    Request Your Custom Title Now! Mr Mxyzptlk's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Trinidad and Tobago (Trinidad)
    Posts
    36,795
    My point is just that cricket is way too batsman oriented nowadays. Bowlers barely have a chance anymore.

  9. #9
    State Vice-Captain Gotchya's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Lahore, Pakistan
    Posts
    1,399
    If you get an inside edge, the presumption is that you're trying to play at the ball so shouldn't be given out.
    Nobody has pointed out that once a batsman gets an inside edge there is no telling where it will end up. How can an umpire judge an angle which deflects the ball almost instantaneously ? I think thats the primary reason why LBW's are not given off inside edges, and not the presumption that the batsman is playing a shot.
    Once the game is over, the king and the pawn go back in the same box

  10. #10
    State Vice-Captain Gotchya's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Lahore, Pakistan
    Posts
    1,399
    My point is just that cricket is way too batsman oriented nowadays. Bowlers barely have a chance anymore.
    On the contrary, i think that the one bouncer an over rule has made it even. Its a much more even battle out there now then before.



Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •