Cricket Betting Site Betway
Results 1 to 10 of 10
Like Tree5Likes
  • 1 Post By Fuller Pilch
  • 1 Post By jcas0167
  • 2 Post By TNT
  • 1 Post By Riggins

Thread: Home umpires biased with lbws - study

  1. #1
    International Regular
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Unzud (aka NZ)
    Posts
    3,429

    Home umpires biased with lbws - study

    Here is a newspaper article about a stats study published in the journal of the royal stats society which shows home umpires give disproportionate nos of lbws. It looks as if subcontinental and convict umpires are the worst offenders:

    Gemma Ware: Howzat? Home umpires more biased - study

    It is tough enough to win away from home as it is and this doesn't help
    Last edited by Fuller Pilch; 13-01-2015 at 11:18 PM.
    jcas0167 likes this.

  2. #2
    State Vice-Captain jcas0167's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Wellington
    Posts
    1,223
    No surprise, although I found this interesting.

    "Strikingly, we found that the advantage to home teams from home umpires was strongest in the final two innings of the match," said Gregory-Smith, a lecturer in economics at the University of Sheffield. "So there is little evidence that bias towards home teams from home umpires was driven primarily by crowd pressure.
    Last edited by jcas0167; 13-01-2015 at 11:37 PM.
    RossTaylorsBox likes this.

  3. #3
    Hall of Fame Member Hurricane's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Don't be jealous of the Georgie Pie super smash
    Posts
    15,199
    I always knew in the 80s we were getting the wrong end of the stick.
    1) Ross is Boss.
    2) See point 1.

    Leading the charge against nuances being used in posts.

    Overrated XI M Bracewell, Burns, Rahane, Don Voges, Bairstow, Alecz Day, Donovan Grobelaar, Luke Ronchi, Faulkner, Dan Christian, Permaul

  4. #4
    TNT
    TNT is offline
    International 12th Man TNT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    australia
    Posts
    1,564
    This report assumes that every team should get exactly the same amount of LBW's per match.

    If you look at Australia since Jan 2000 in home matches they have lost 1135 wickets and taken 1546 wickets, I would expect them to have a higher percentage of LBW's than the opposition, around 20% in fact.
    Howe_zat and The_Bunny like this.
    If you nick it walk


  5. #5
    International Captain Riggins's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    6,258
    Quote Originally Posted by TNT View Post
    This report assumes that every team should get exactly the same amount of LBW's per match.

    If you look at Australia since Jan 2000 in home matches they have lost 1135 wickets and taken 1546 wickets, I would expect them to have a higher percentage of LBW's than the opposition, around 20% in fact.
    Why? Just taking more wickets shouldn't necessarily change the distribution of how the wickets fall.


    Edit: I agree that some bowlers are more likely to get more LBW's than others, obviously.
    zorax likes this.
    The sort of general malaise that only the genius possess and the insane lament.

  6. #6
    U19 Debutant Binkley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    By the seaside
    Posts
    353
    Quote Originally Posted by TNT View Post
    This report assumes that every team should get exactly the same amount of LBW's per match.
    Does it say that? I tried to look at the source paper but it is behind a paywall, but the newspaper report doesn't state that. I would be extraordinarily surprised if something got published in any sort of reputable journal with that kind of flaw in the analysis.

  7. #7
    TNT
    TNT is offline
    International 12th Man TNT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    australia
    Posts
    1,564
    Quote Originally Posted by Binkley View Post
    Does it say that? I tried to look at the source paper but it is behind a paywall, but the newspaper report doesn't state that. I would be extraordinarily surprised if something got published in any sort of reputable journal with that kind of flaw in the analysis.
    From the report:

    They found that in matches overseen by two home umpires, batsmen from the visiting team were given out lbw about 16 per cent more often than their opponents from the home side.

  8. #8
    International Vice-Captain
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Location
    Osaka, Japan
    Posts
    4,207
    I'm at uni, giving it a read now.

  9. #9
    International Vice-Captain
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Location
    Osaka, Japan
    Posts
    4,207
    OK, so it seems that:

    "They found that in matches overseen by two home umpires, batsmen from the visiting team were given out lbw about 16 per cent more often than their opponents from the home side."

    is just the descriptive statistics used at the start of the paper without any of the authors' analysis. They do control for things like superiority in home conditions and the conditions themselves in a separate analysis. I don't think the author of the news article actually read the paper properly.

  10. #10
    International Vice-Captain
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Location
    Osaka, Japan
    Posts
    4,207
    "There is a very clear pattern. The magnitude of home advantage is biggest when there are two home umpires and smallest when there are two neutral umpires. The marginal effect when there are two home umpires is −0.284, implying a decrease of approximately 21 percentage points in the number of LBW decisions per innings given against home teams. This is roughly equivalent to one extra LBW decision in favour of the home team in every innings, which is certainly enough to have a major influence on the outcome of the match. The effect is halved (−0.134) when there is one neutral umpire and reduced again when both umpires are neutral, to the point of statistical insignificance."

    So having two home umpires is the same as one favourable decision every innings. Authors also conclude it's due to favouritism as opposed to the crowd which as the previous poster said, is pretty interesting.



Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

Similar Threads

  1. Home Pitch and or Home practice by yourself?
    By MrDucksWorth in forum Coaching and Equipment Forum
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 28-01-2012, 05:01 PM
  2. Gilchrist, LBWs and Seamers
    By Neil Pickup in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 03-11-2005, 06:06 PM
  3. Should "home" umpires be re-introduced into test cricket?
    By Slow Love™ in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 31
    Last Post: 30-11-2004, 12:04 PM
  4. Third umpire deciding LBWs and bat-pad catches etc
    By aussie_beater in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 12-09-2002, 06:09 PM

Posting Permissions

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