White lines to aid umpires in LBW calls

[Kiwi]

White lines to aid umpires in LBW calls

Close on the heels of discussions over a third on-field umpire, the International Cricket Council (ICC) is also considering white stump-to-stump lines painted on the pitch to aid umpires in judging leg-before decisions.

A report in the Guardian said that the experiment, discussed over the past week, was preferred to the aid of television technology. "We haven't decided whether to use an unbroken or dotted white line," said Dave Richardson, the ICC's cricket manager. "But this is an experiment worth introducing."

The Guardian report pointed out that such a system would give the batsman a good idea of where the ball would pitch, doing away with the key batting skill of assessing line, particularly on the off stump.

The ICC may also introduce an earphone, wired to the stump microphone, for umpires to hear the sound of edges more clearly.
------------------------------------------------------------

I would be interested in your thoughts on this. I am not happy about it because it makes judgement so easy for a batter. We have lines like this at some of the indoor nets to help bowlers and It makes it so easy. Your thoughts???

 

[R_Powell_fan]

I would be interested in your thoughts on this. I am not happy about it because it makes judgement so easy for a batter. We have lines like this at some of the indoor nets to help bowlers and It makes it so easy. Your thoughts???

I would be against it for the same reason, it would give the batsmen even more of an advantage.

Also, I once heard a commentator suggest that umpires can wear something like visors or glasses showing three lines, but then again that wouldn't be very useful because the umpire has to quickly shift his eyesight from the bowling crease( to check where the front front landed) to where the ball is pitching and it would be hard to align the three lines in the visor to the stumps quickly enough if the bowler is quick....

Another idea was to have a second pair of umpires on the field in another session, which is also nullifed on grounds that that would damage the consistency of umpiring...

 

[luckyeddie]

This got done on Tuffers last night.

It transpires (because Gus was either on - or listening in on - the ICC panel discussing it) that they're actually going to try it in the nets (he says) and see what umpires think.

Amidst general hilarity and guffaws, the opinion was that it was a non-starter for the reasons already stated - it's already a batsman's game.

The second point, though, is one which I think warrants further discussion, because umpires in the top games are already in a position to talk to the third umpire via a walkie-talkie.

Substitute a pc-style headset and microphone, tap in the sound feeds and away you go.

 

[marc71178]

I really hope this doesn't get implemented, but I expect it will be.

 

[Simon]

I really hope this doesn't get implemented, but I expect it will be.

yeh and it will be gotten rid of just as quick

 

[dezzygillespie]

I remember, after the West Indies series, joking to someone that having the lines on the pitch might help the umps but to think they are actually going to try it!

Lines down the pitch!? -It's just not cricket!!
:O

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

The same was thought of ODI's when it began...

 

[Swanny]

WE have technology for alot of things in the game, but for lbws why don't we just use Hawkeye. Im assuming everyone in other countries at least knows what this is, im not sure if its just an English TV thing or what. But look it tells you exactly if the balls going to hit the stumps or not. So its almost perfect.If this thing can guide missles(im almost sure thats where the technology comes from) im pretty sure it can track cricket balls. Then we have the right decision everytime. True the umpires won't have much to do but so what. It means 100%( perhaps 99%) accuracy rather than the current level of lbw decisions which are about 85% id say.An improvement worth having id say.
As for the white lines, sounds a bit silly really, how much idfference will it make?not much as i can see.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

As far as I know Hawkeye is exclusive to English cricket coverage, but I think it's an excellent system and seems to have a fairly high accuracy.

 

[luckyeddie]

I listened to Tanny Grig rubbishing the idea tonight during the West Indies v Sri Lanka game. He also pointed out that the ICC Cricket Committee (all ex-players, hence my Gus reference earlier) will look at it and - Tony hopes - laugh it out of existence.

The problem with Hawkeye is that it isn't universally used.

Just remove Ashocker from the panel. Problem solved.

 

[marc71178]

True the umpires won't have much to do but so what. It means 100%( perhaps 99%) accuracy rather than the current level of lbw decisions which are about 85% id say.

Absolute rubbish. It's more like 99% than 85% - it is very rare an umpire makes a wrong decision, but that always gets the press, yet the countless right decisions he makes aren't mentioned.

 

[Cloete]

As far as I know Hawkeye is exclusive to English cricket coverage, but I think it's an excellent system and seems to have a fairly high accuracy.

nope we use it in australia. and amazingly enuff we were actually the 1st cricket nation to come out with it in cricket . but it's gr8. i get anooyed when there's a west indies tour and i can't see the LBW's with hawkeye!!

 

[luckyeddie]

I wouldn't put it as high as 99%, but certainly not as low as 85%.

The pitching 'outside leg' one has been a problem in the last few months because one person has got about 4 clearly wrong (no names, but we know who it is - I've made fun of him enough).

The majority of LBW incorrect decisions would not be helped by the lines - because they are the 'did he get a piece of bat on it or not' ones.

Wiring up the umpires with earpieces would be a much better option - and allowing the third umpire the power of overrule in the event of clearly incorrect decisions wouldn't be a bad thing either - and I mean ANY clearly incorrect decision.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

i get anooyed when there's a west indies tour and i can't see the LBW's with hawkeye!!

Well then you're clearly spoilt and easily annoyed.

 

[Simon]

the hawkeye is the way to go for LBW's. Its usually very conclusive. As mentioned, the problem is not every country uses it.

 

[Eclipse]

Absolute rubbish. It's more like 99% than 85% - it is very rare an umpire makes a wrong decision, but that always gets the press, yet the countless right decisions he makes aren't mentioned.

I would say it's more like 90%

The West Indies Vs Australia test series I reckon about 40% of the LBW decisions were incorrect mostly against the West Indies as well.

 

[Cloete]

Well then you're clearly spoilt and easily annoyed.

no i don't think that's the case. i didn't mean it literally of course. u think i get soo ****ed off for sumthin so minor as that?? geez get a grip m8. it was a joke!!

 

[marc71178]

The West Indies Vs Australia test series I reckon about 40% of the LBW decisions were incorrect mostly against the West Indies as well.

Does this include all the one's correctly ruled not out?

 

[Eclipse]

Does this include all the one's correctly ruled not out?

Why wouldn’t it?

Just to confirm that for you marc yes.

 

[PY]

Question is for me is whether it would actually help the umpires having lines on the pitch and I guess the only way to get an answer is our resident Umpire(s) (Eyes?). Don't know if it would help that much because problems usually occur, as you mentioned LE, when there's a question of a tickle off the bat.

P.S. The ear-piece idea is fine til it breaks. Like the rugby yesterday, there was a five minute delay while the ref got his ear-piece sorted out......he didn't really need it but had become used to it so wanted it.