Gilchrist given out LBW...

[Scallywag]

On an innings per innings basis, Gillchrist gets a lil less lbw appeals than the likes of tendulkar-ponting-lara-dravid etc.... but there is multiple shouts against him in almost eveyr big innings....
I find it extremely hard to beleive that NOT A SINGLE ONE of them in OZ soil was gonna hit the stumps....the statistical probability of that is miniscule.

As per 'since you cant prove it otherwise, i will spew shyte' philosophy...i find it disturbing..its like arguing you didnt commit murder because the body was very well disposed off without any tangiable proof left...
but in this case, all you gotto do is WATCH cricket and see the appeals against him...lbw appeals are less than normal against him...but NOT non-existant.... given that almost every player has almost a dozen lbw appeals against them almost everytime they play till they get 70/80/100+ etc....
and not a SINGLE one was worthy of being upheld against Gilly in OZ and only 7 in his ENTIRE career ?
Puh-lease.......
thats as statistically likely as a player scoring a test double century without playing out a single dot-ball.

C_C care to give us a LBW% comparison to Richards and Lloyd.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

C_C care to give us a LBW% comparison to Richards and Lloyd.

Richards was out lbw at home 6 times and away 15 times, and Lloyd just once at home and 14 times away.

Two other players I know of who were rarely given out lbw at home are Bill Lawry and Javed Miandad. Lawry was out lbw just 7 times in his entire career, but all of them were away, and was bowled 22 times, so perhaps he simply had a technique that was not conducive to being hit on the pads much. Miandad was out lbw very often - 33 times, but just 6 times at home. LBWs made up 8.22% of his home dismissals and 28.42% of his away dismissals.

All these players however played in the days before neutral umpires, when home bias was much more of a realistic possibility. I'm not sure the same suspicions are really justified with regard to Gilchrist, since there's no obvious reason why he would be given out lbw a lot overseas and not in Australia. Personally I think a likely reason for it would be the prevalence of turning tracks overseas. Given that all 7 of his test lbws have been to spinners he obviously has a problem getting out lbw to them, and 6 of those 7 lbws have been in India and Sri Lanka, on turning pitches against predominantly spin bowling. The only other one is at Eden Park to Paul Wiseman.

So, given the neutral umpires policy, it could be fairly said that Gilchrist has never been out lbw in Australia, England, the West Indies or South Africa in tests... all the places with less spin friendly conditions, aside from New Zealand.

 

[marc71178]

No it suprises me that he is never given out when hit in front...that is what suprises me

But if he rarely gets hit in front, how is going to be given out in that way?

You're sounding like a broken record, and a sore losing one at that.

 

[marc71178]

like i said..on average there are ATLEAST a dozen lbw appeals against a batsman by the time he scores a ton or so....

I'd be interested to know where you got this figure from?

However if it's true, it also reveals how few LBW appeals are upheld, thus if someone gets hit on the pads less often, it stands to reason he'd almost never be given.

 

[marc71178]

And more food for thought regarding Gilchrist.

He scores at an extremely high rate meaning compared to the "average" player he has far far fewer dot balls.

Therefore he has far less of a chance to be hit on the pads!

 

[telsor]

A theory...

He doesn't get out LBW when his eye is in ( as evidenced by only getting LBW's on low scores ), and due to more familiarity with home pitches, his eye gets 'in' much more quickly. A test of this woudl be where he has been out LBW...If places like the subcontinent, where pitches are most unlike Australia's have a (relatively) high number of his dismissals that way then I would consider this to be a factor.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

A theory...

He doesn't get out LBW when his eye is in ( as evidenced by only getting LBW's on low scores ), and due to more familiarity with home pitches, his eye gets 'in' much more quickly. A test of this woudl be where he has been out LBW...If places like the subcontinent, where pitches are most unlike Australia's have a (relatively) high number of his dismissals that way then I would consider this to be a factor.

As I pointed out earlier, 6 of his 7 lbws have come in the subcontinent, four in India and two in Sri Lanka. I agree that he doesn't get out lbw when his eye is in, because he doesn't get hit on the pads then, but I think the regularity of lbw decisions in the sub-continent is to do with not just the pitches but the frequency of facing spinners there, since he only ever gets out lbw to spinners he seems to have a vulnerability in that area, and if you struggle with getting out lbw to spinners on turning tracks, it's going to happen a bit in India and Sri Lanka.

 

[benchmark00]

Maybe him being a leftie comes into consideration also, most fast bowlers are right arm over bowlers, pitching outside leg, and the appeals are not real shouts...

 

[Slow Love™]

And more food for thought regarding Gilchrist.

He scores at an extremely high rate meaning compared to the "average" player he has far far fewer dot balls.

Therefore he has far less of a chance to be hit on the pads!

This has absolutely nothing to do with a disparity between home and away dismissals though.

 

[Slow Love™]

As I pointed out earlier, 6 of his 7 lbws have come in the subcontinent, four in India and two in Sri Lanka. I agree that he doesn't get out lbw when his eye is in, because he doesn't get hit on the pads then, but I think the regularity of lbw decisions in the sub-continent is to do with not just the pitches but the frequency of facing spinners there, since he only ever gets out lbw to spinners he seems to have a vulnerability in that area, and if you struggle with getting out lbw to spinners on turning tracks, it's going to happen a bit in India and Sri Lanka.

Your (and telsor's) theory is not a bad one - does anybody know how the ODI dismissals stack up as to where they occurred?

Regardless, no dismissals out of 46 in tests and 2 dismissals in 76 ODIs at home is a surprising figure. I might argue that it would be down solely to an absolutely incredible eye on Gilly's part, except for the fact that his dismissals bowled seem to be more comparable to the average.

One thing I've never understood is why the umpires being influenced by crowd excitement seems so out of bounds to everybody. I agree that alleging that umpires are cheating is a very serious allegation that needs to be backed up pretty heavily, but the idea that they could be influenced by their surrounds or outside pressures doesn't seem so amazingly beyond the pale to me. Or, of course, Gilly could just be lucky in that regard, and he gets the benefit of the shouts a little more often. It doesn't mean he isn't one of the most amazing players of our era.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

Your (and telsor's) theory is not a bad one - does anybody know how the ODI dismissals stack up as to where they occurred?

I posted his ODI LBW dismissals early in the thread. Oddly enough, it doesn't follow the same trends, but I think this could possibly be put down to the different nature of the game. He relies somewhat on a solid defensive game mixed with brutal attacking boundary strokes in tests, while in ODIs obviously he adjusts his game to be more generally aggressive and involve turning the strike over more. Perhaps this results in weakening his defensive game and therefore increasing his chances of being dismissed lbw to bowlers he would usually handle with ease.

Anyway, he has been dismissed lbw twice by spinners (Mohammad Rafique and Neil Johnson), and nine times by seamers (Hollioake, Ealham, Streak, Walsh, Akhtar, Suji, Anderson, Bond and Zoysa) in ODIs.

As far as location goes, only two of his lbws are in the sub-continent, both in Sri Lanka. There are three in Engalnd, two in Australia and one each in Zimbabwe, Kenya, West Indies and South Africa aside from that.

One thing I've never understood is why the umpires being influenced by crowd excitement seems so out of bounds to everybody. I agree that alleging that umpires are cheating is a very serious allegation that needs to be backed up pretty heavily, but the idea that they could be influenced by their surrounds or outside pressures doesn't seem so amazingly beyond the pale to me. Or, of course, Gilly could just be lucky in that regard, and he gets the benefit of the shouts a little more often. It doesn't mean he isn't one of the most amazing players of our era.

It's not entirely unthinkable, but surely in this regard Australia would have a fairly minor benefit compared to other countries. I mean think about the level of parochial passion, noise and pressure for an umpire in Australia compared to India, Pakistan or the West Indies? The environment is much more intense in those countries, and I can't see why Australian players would get the benefit of slanted umpiring decisions due to crowd pressure and the home team in those countries would not. Besides, I think a professional umpire should and would be able to cope with the crowd in making a decision, surely it's one of the most basic elements of being a good international umpire.

 

[Slow Love™]

I posted his ODI LBW dismissals early in the thread. Oddly enough, it doesn't follow the same trends, but I think this could possibly be put down to the different nature of the game. He relies somewhat on a solid defensive game mixed with brutal attacking boundary strokes in tests, while in ODIs obviously he adjusts his game to be more generally aggressive and involve turning the strike over more. Perhaps this results in weakening his defensive game and therefore increasing his chances of being dismissed lbw to bowlers he would usually handle with ease

Oops, I missed you posting that earlier, apologies. Would've been handy if it had followed the same pattern as the tests though...

IIt's not entirely unthinkable, but surely in this regard Australia would have a fairly minor benefit compared to other countries. I mean think about the level of parochial passion, noise and pressure for an umpire in Australia compared to India, Pakistan or the West Indies? The environment is much more intense in those countries, and I can't see why Australian players would get the benefit of slanted umpiring decisions due to crowd pressure and the home team in those countries would not. Besides, I think a professional umpire should and would be able to cope with the crowd in making a decision, surely it's one of the most basic elements of being a good international umpire.

Well, I was speaking specifically about Gilchrist because of his extraordinary ability to provide a rush and demoralize the opposition in this case, rather than Australian players intrinsically (in fact, I've always felt that Steve Waugh, for example, got far more bad decisions than good over his career).

I don't think that Australia would be affected more than other countries on the sole basis of crowd support at home (it's eminently possible that there's a disparity for many international batsmen in terms of LBW decisions between home conditions and away, although Gilly's low home count is obviously on the extreme end of the scale) - that doesn't discount it as a possible factor in general though. I do happen to think there's room for the possibility that a team's dominance can influence the close calls (and particularly, by extension, in home series). There's no reason this needs to apply only to Australia - just to whoever's dominant at the time. I don't consider it unfeasible, and I didn't when the West Indies were dominant either. Maybe my perspective is mediated by having been on the other side of the fence in the mid-80's. I don't even see it as that controversial an opinion, to be honest, in general interactions with Aussie cricket fans - the iron-clad parochial certainty evidenced at web forums notwithstanding.

I don't appreciate baseless claims that umpires are deliberately cheating, but it's worth noting that umpires are human beings, and don't operate in a vacuum. An umpire doesn't necessarily have to be "unprofessional" to be affected by such factors - they don't even have to be overtly conscious of it. It's a very difficult job for a variety of reasons, and some perform it better than others.

 

[BoyBrumby]

I do recall that Naved-al-Hasan had Gilly utterly plum in the 2nd (? I think) match of the VB series in the very first over. It might've missed leg, but was hitting half-way up middle! It was as nailed-on as I can imagine an LBW being, yet somehow not given.

I'm not for one second suggesting any hint of dishonesty, but I guess the possibility remains that umps may be subconsciously influenced by the crowd. I think cricinfo produced a stat to show that the Aussies were three or four times more likely to get a decision in the series than Pakistan or the Windies.

Food for thought....

 

[Zinzan]

But if he rarely gets hit in front, how is going to be given out in that way?

You're sounding like a broken record, and a sore losing one at that.

So any objectionable comment about the opposition means ones a sore loser does it?

I'm sorry i believe Gilchrist has had more than his share of luck....but my comments only come from what I've seen.

Nothing to do with losing. NZ would have lost all those matches against Aust even if they did get favourable decisions against Gilchrist. They probably what have just lasted a bit longer.

So its nothing to do with losing. I thought exactly the same in the Pakistan/aust series.

 

[marc71178]

So any objectionable comment about the opposition means ones a sore loser does it?

Possibly not in isolation.

But making the same comment 3 or 4 times in a very short period of time is a different matter.

 

[Zinzan]

But if he rarely gets hit in front, how is going to be given out in that way?

You're sounding like a broken record, and a sore losing one at that.

It will be interesting if he gets a couple of plum LBW's early in his innings in the Ashes later in the year and is given not out. Wonder if English fans will remain silent.

 

[marc71178]

It will be interesting if he gets a couple of plum LBW's early in his innings in the Ashes later in the year and is given not out. Wonder if English fans will remain silent.

From past experience of English fans on here I would say yes.

 

[Blaze]

From past experience of English fans on here I would say yes.

I truely doubt it.. not talking about you Marc but others

 

[marc71178]

Actually to be fair, just about every Englishman on here doesn't tend to moan about things.

Far more likely to attack the players.

 

[age_master]

that chances of him starting to get hit on the pad alot by the time he gets to england are so low it shouldn't matter anyway