When will the ICC decide to automate front-foot no-ball calls?

[OverratedSanity]

This has been a problem for years.

Umpires should either call every no-ball on field, or they shouldn't call no-balls at all and leave it up to the third umpire. Right now, they're doing something which is in an awkward area between the two. Sometimes, they call it on field (which as we saw today in the Pak-SL test wasn't even a ****ing no-ball), but other times it's like they ignore it and only rfer when there's a wicket. It's so goddamn lazy. They've got to choose between the two.

Not only is it causing some bull**** decisions (like the infamous Voges no-ball, the Gunaratne call in the SL-Zim test and the no-ball today), but it has to screw with the bowlers' heads too. Their frame of reference for where their front foot is landing is no longer trustworthy. It's a small thing but it's so rubbish to watch. What's stopping them just having the 3rd/4th umpire look at the front foot on every delivery?

 

[mr_mister]

Agree 100%

 

[vcs]

This has been a problem for years.

Umpires should either call every no-ball on field, or they shouldn't call no-balls at all and leave it up to the third umpire. Right now, they're doing something which is in an awkward area between the two. Sometimes, they call it on field (which as we saw today in the Pak-SL test wasn't even a ****ing no-ball), but other times it's like they ignore it and only rfer when there's a wicket. It's so goddamn lazy. They've got to choose between the two.

Not only is it causing some bull**** decisions (like the infamous Voges no-ball, the Gunaratne call in the SL-Zim test and the no-ball today), but it has to screw with the bowlers' heads too. Their frame of reference for where their front foot is landing is no longer trustworthy. It's a small thing but it's so rubbish to watch. What's stopping them just having the 3rd/4th umpire look at the front foot on every delivery?

Technologically, it's ridiculously easy to do as well. One of my students told me that he was interning in a startup that was using pressure sensors and Bluetooth to do this. I don't know what happened with it.

 

[weldone]

Umpires should call no-balls only when they are 100% sure. Any benefit of doubt must go to bowler.

But yeah, agree that automating is the ideal solution.

 

[Prince EWS]

I think it's inevitable, but this is actually a rather challenging question as I can't think of a potential actual event that might trigger them into making it happen. My best guess is that it'll just randomly part of a set of revised playing conditions at one point.

 

[mr_mister]

I think it's inevitable, but this is actually a rather challenging question as I can't think of a potential actual event that might trigger them into making it happen. My best guess is that it'll just randomly part of a set of revised playing conditions at one point.

maybe a big ****-up in a high profile match? like an ashes decider or a WC final

 

[Prince EWS]

maybe a big ****-up in a high profile match? like an ashes decider or a WC final

This was my first thought but I find it hard to imagine that happening. The system they have in place now prevents wickets falling off no-balls when they shouldn't -- it just allows umpires to miss a bunch of 'minor' no balls.

If a team fell only a few runs short in a World Cup final chase and there was a massive no ball off the last ball, I guess that wouldn't be picked up and it'd trigger it. It just seems like such an unlikely event though given the third umpire already intervenes on wickets. I think we'll see it tossed in randomly one year rather than as a response to something, which makes guessing on when it'll happen kind of hard.

 

[mr_mister]

but the system doesn't prevent fair dismissals being stopped by an incorrect no-ball decision, as just seen in the SL-Pak match. Imagine if Aslam tonned up, now imagine if that happened in a WC final

 

[StephenZA]

Think it will happen. But I dont think it is quite as easy as people think, how do you know what is behind the line, versus in front, not touching the line, or even well behind the line? It is not the same rules as with goal line technology etc Along with cost and pitch preparation, who gets to insert the pressure triggers? I dont think it is simple as people expect.

Unless we are talking a simple 3rd umpire call using current techonology... still dont think it is simple in real time though.

 

[OverratedSanity]

This was my first thought but I find it hard to imagine that happening. The system they have in place now prevents wickets falling off no-balls when they shouldn't -- it just allows umpires to miss a bunch of 'minor' no balls.

If a team fell only a few runs short in a World Cup final chase and there was a massive no ball off the last ball, I guess that wouldn't be picked up and it'd trigger it. It just seems like such an unlikely event though given the third umpire already intervenes on wickets. I think we'll see it tossed in randomly one year rather than as a response to something, which makes guessing on when it'll happen kind of hard.

This happened back in the 1999 wc semifinal where Fleming bowled a no-ball and it wasn't called. Honestly I don't know, maybe it needs India getting screwed somehow in a big wc game for something to change.

It's not like the 4th umpire does anything sitting up in his cubicle all day. Give his fat ass something to do ffs.

 

[Howe_zat]

Didn't they do this in the 2016 summer? TV umpire to call front foot no-balls in England-Pakistan ODIs - ESPNcricinfo

What was the outcome of that?

 

[Lillian Thomson]

The front foot rule has always been a nonsense. With the back foot rule it’s easier for the umpires and gives the batsman time to adjust his shot and have a slog when it’s called. It’s pretty tough for automated technology to call it because the line rule is quite complex and the batsman is lurking the other side of the crease.

 

[weldone]

Didn't they do this in the 2016 summer? TV umpire to call front foot no-balls in England-Pakistan ODIs - ESPNcricinfo

What was the outcome of that?

That ODI series was not very eventful. Amir was new after his return and he made 100% sure that he didn't bowl any frontfoot no-ball. I don't remember 3rd umpire calling no-balls for any other bowler either.

 

[SillyCowCorner1]

I like the human factor in calling no-balls.

 

[Howe_zat]

That ODI series was not very eventful. Amir was new after his return and he made 100% sure that he didn't bowl any frontfoot no-ball. I don't remember 3rd umpire calling no-balls for any other bowler either.

Happened to Wahab Riaz a fair bit.

 

[Victor Ian]

Couldn't you just stick a bit of 'metal' on the back of the bowlers foot and then put some sensors in the stumps to triangulate the position of that 'metal'? And then it needs to beep loudly like that cyclops in the tennis, so that the batsman gets to make his slog early, and so that the crowd gets to impersonate it.

 

[mr_mister]

I was just gonna make a post about how it should do that obnoxious horn like a tennis foot fault ha

Beaten to it. Still, a good idea for sure

 

[fredfertang]

Front foot no balls are completely unnecessary - there should be a six run penalty and any bowler who gets called three times should be banned from bowling for the rest of the innings

 

[Top_Cat]

The rest is all fine if the tech is up to scratch but:

Not only is it causing some bull**** decisions (like the infamous Voges no-ball, the Gunaratne call in the SL-Zim test and the no-ball today), but it has to screw with the bowlers' heads too. Their frame of reference for where their front foot is landing is no longer trustworthy.

Don't have a lot of time for this complaint from bowlers. Grow up and set your mark 5cm back. Ain't gonna go from Akhtar to Ealham if you weren't Akhtar in the first place.

 

[OverratedSanity]

The rest is all fine if the tech is up to scratch but:



Don't have a lot of time for this complaint from bowlers. Grow up and set your mark 5cm back. Ain't gonna go from Akhtar to Ealham if you weren't Akhtar in the first place.

I'd agree with you if the umpires were consistent one way or the other. If they're not calling them at all(thus not helping the bowlers get a reference), then yeah, they should just set their runup back a few inches. I've made that argument before myself .

But what's happening is that they sometimes call on field and other times entire days go by with no on-field calls whatsoever. That's sending mixed messages to bowlers and helps no one.