Why do umpires always get bagged out?

[Jakester1288]

It's always the umpires. No matter what they do, the crowds, spectators, fans, critics, forumers, analysts, commentators etc always find a way to bag them out for something they do wrong or that doesn't suit them. They are humans and humans make mistakes. Some people don't realize that sometimes.

[stumpski]

Just a feature of modern sporting life, sadly. I have virtually no interest in football, but it seems that the managers of losing teams almost routinely blame the referee - rather that than give the other team any credit, which would be a sign of weakness, I suppose.

[stumpski]

As you'll probably all know it permeates down to the lowest levels of the sport as well - in my playing days I always volunteered to 'do the book' as I got fed up with obvious signs of dissent when umpiring, for example the 'double teapot' treatment from bowlers even when just calling a wide.

[Smith]

So you mean the players, whose careers are on the line because of umpiring errors, are spared any blame when they do bad? Umpires are paid professionals and are expected to do their job. If they fall short, they deserve to be bagged. When they do a good job, like Simon Taufel, they are feted as equally as well. So I don't see the merit in your point, sorry.

[Jono]

Cricket umpires cop it far less than umpires from other sports, particularly football codes.

You can't verbally abuse a cricket umpire without taking another mortgage. In other sports its a daily occurrence.

[Top_Cat]

Originally Posted by Smith

So you mean the players, whose careers are on the line because of umpiring errors, are spared any blame when they do bad? Umpires are paid professionals and are expected to do their job. If they fall short, they deserve to be bagged. When they do a good job, like Simon Taufel, they are feted as equally as well. So I don't see the merit in your point, sorry.

They're really not that well-paid. Only the elite panel umpires can actually do it professionally. It doesn't really compensate for the attention and scrutiny some bad decisions can get sometimes although, as Jono said, umpires/refs in other sports cop it far worse.

I mean, if you screw up in your job, you might get bollocked by the boss or your manager. Do it as a sports official and you get it from the crowd, the players (a lot of the time, just because they disagree, not that you weren't right in the end), the press, fans, etc. The scrutiny can be intense, completely disproportionate to the pay I reckon.

[Uppercut]

Originally Posted by Top_Cat

They're really not that well-paid. Only the elite panel umpires can actually do it professionally. It doesn't really compensate for the attention and scrutiny some bad decisions can get sometimes although, as Jono said, umpires/refs in other sports cop it far worse.

I mean, if you screw up in your job, you might get bollocked by the boss or your manager. Do it as a sports official and you get it from the crowd, the players (a lot of the time, just because they disagree, not that you weren't right in the end), the press, fans, etc. The scrutiny can be intense, completely disproportionate to the pay I reckon.

The indifference principle states otherwise. If it was really that bad they'd have to pay them more or noone would do it

As jobs go, i think professional umpires have a fantastic deal.

[Top_Cat]

Originally Posted by Uppercut

The indifference principle states otherwise. If it was really that bad they'd have to pay them more or noone would do it

As jobs go, i think professional umpires have a fantastic deal.

Pfft, have you ever been one? Then STFU. haha

To turn it around, if it's such a sweet deal, why is there such a turn-over of umpires doing ODI's/T20's, why does the elite panel never change despite so many questions over the ability of the current lot to do the job and why has there been, for so long, a concerted effort to convince some umpires, clearly past it, to hang around longer?

Anyway, I'm sure the professionals (elite panel) are doing alright but what of those who aren't elite panel umpires? Same scrutiny at (from my understanding) half the pay.

[Uppercut]

Originally Posted by Top_Cat

Pfft, have you ever been one? Then STFU. haha

To turn it around, if it's such a sweet deal, why is there such a turn-over of umpires doing ODI's/T20's, why does the elite panel never change despite so many questions over the ability of the current lot to do the job and why has there been, for so long, a concerted effort to convince some umpires, clearly past it, to hang around longer?

Anyway, I'm sure the professionals (elite panel) are doing alright but what of those who aren't elite panel umpires? Same scrutiny at (from my understanding) half the pay.

Personally i'd quite like to be an international umpire. Follow summer around the world, watch top-quality cricket from the best seat in the house, meet all kinds of interesting people. Umpires get nowhere near the abuse of someone like a football referee.

If it was really that unappealing, they'd just make the pay substantial enough to keep the numbers of people who want to do it adequate.

[nz0003]

Its obviously because once you start praising the umps theyll stop trying.

[Richard]

Originally Posted by Uppercut

Personally i'd quite like to be an international umpire. Follow summer around the world, watch top-quality cricket from the best seat in the house, meet all kinds of interesting people. Umpires get nowhere near the abuse of someone like a football referee.

If it was really that unappealing, they'd just make the pay substantial enough to keep the numbers of people who want to do it adequate.

I seriously hope that was an intentional pun, 'cos it's diabolical if you can make that without realising it.

Anyway there's no question to my mind that the cricitism is often disproportionate to the mistakes made - and also occasionally it's fit for them.

There's also no question that something needs to be done to cut down on Umpiring errors. Not surprisingly this referral nonsense has failed to do such a thing, so maybe - eventually - we could have a system that will.

[Debris]

I know I am going to be alone here but I don't mind a few umpiring mistakes a game, usually working on the theory of one shocking decision an innings is acceptable. It does give people something to talk about.

[Uppercut]

Originally Posted by Debris

I know I am going to be alone here but I don't mind a few umpiring mistakes a game, usually working on the theory of one shocking decision an innings is acceptable. It does give people something to talk about.

If a big terrible decision costs Australia the Ashes you're not going to turn round and say "wow, i love having something to talk about".

[Richard]

Yeah, Umpiring errors are a bit like the opposite of global warming and the dominance of bat over ball - when you just consider the general nature and aren't in the immediate aftermath of one, it's fine; but when you've actually just experienced at first hand one of the things, it's outrage-inducing.

I've said it before - if we can eliminate the obvious error in significant cricket (and we most certainly can, without great expense) then the game will before very long at all move into a "how on Earth did we tolerate this for so long?" mentality.

[Debris]

Originally Posted by Uppercut

If a big terrible decision costs Australia the Ashes you're not going to turn round and say "wow, i love having something to talk about".

Actually, I am. In fact, I thought the decision against Kasper in the last Ashes (which arguably cost us the series) was a bit dodgy but you accept what the umpire decides. McDermott in Adelaide against the Windies also comes to mind. Pretty much any close series is going to have a bit of controversy and it only makes it more interesting. You swear at the umpires a bit at the time but soom get over it.