SA Footy

It can't be long before field umpires no longer exist in Test cricket.

What do they actually do out there these days?

Any contentious decisions are referred to the TV umpire upstairs.

Counting balls bowled? No need. That's displayed on the scoreboard at most venues.

Umpires don't even bother watching for no-balls. When Peter Siddle dismissed Kevin Pietersen in Adelaide, umpire Dharmasena asked for a review of Siddle's front foot and it turned out it was totally behind the popping crease! The fact that he even called for a check on it means he wasn't looking in the first place.

Look at the extras column on the scorecard these days and you'd be lucky to see 3 no-balls given in a whole innings. The only time it seems to get looked at is when a batsman is out.

With cameras trained on the ground from all angles, any decision can be determined upstairs so you might has well have the umps stationed in airconditioned comfort in the grandstand and have the fielding side signalling their appeals towards them. The answers can be given by a red or green light on the scoreboard.

Reckon they'll have remote controlled cameras positioned where the umps used to stand. They'll be in little electric carts that go between square leg and behind the stumps at the bowlers end. They'll have a little speaker in the cart also, sometimes it'll say "wide" or "ball" or "not out". Then there'll be a remote controlled finger that slowly raises for successful appeals.
Something like that.

someone's gotta hold the bowlers hat and sunnies!

As I've said previously, with run outs now and stumpings, the benefit of the doubt is gone. Players are almost behind the stumps but it's still referred.

And with wickets, the benefit is skewed the other way. They're looking for a reason not to give someone out even if they are dismissed in a simplistic fashion. No wonder crowds and commentators are losing patience.

Still need a human presence to temper the argy bargy.

No needs for central umpires to ajudge front foot no balls anymore, may help them deciding where the ball has pitched.

whufc wrote:No needs for central umpires to ajudge front foot no balls anymore, may help them deciding where the ball has pitched.

Staggers me that the 3rd umpire does not simply check every delivery and alerts the central umpires if there is a doubtful one and he needs time to review, would save the farce at Adelaide Oval where every dismissal was checked, cant blame the central umpires they are obviously told to check and be cautious...

Dutchy wrote:

whufc wrote:No needs for central umpires to ajudge front foot no balls anymore, may help them deciding where the ball has pitched.

Staggers me that the 3rd umpire does not simply check every delivery and alerts the central umpires if there is a doubtful one and he needs time to review, would save the farce at Adelaide Oval where every dismissal was checked, cant blame the central umpires they are obviously told to check and be cautious...

Makes you wonder how many they miss when there is no wicket....

The technology, or the rules that are currently applied are there to reinforce the umpire's decision. Surely if a third of the ball is hitting it's still hitting. But it's only hitting if the umpire said it is hitting and it's only missing if the umpire said it was missing. The DRS in England reinforced Howlers and it is also reinforcing some better decisions that have been made in this series by basically the same umpires.

We still need em boyos.

regards,

REB

heater31 wrote:

Dutchy wrote:

whufc wrote:No needs for central umpires to ajudge front foot no balls anymore, may help them deciding where the ball has pitched.

Staggers me that the 3rd umpire does not simply check every delivery and alerts the central umpires if there is a doubtful one and he needs time to review, would save the farce at Adelaide Oval where every dismissal was checked, cant blame the central umpires they are obviously told to check and be cautious...

Makes you wonder how many they miss when there is no wicket....

I watched a bit of Harris on Day 2 from right in line with the crease and i reckon he was bowling 2-3 no-balls per over.
If the umpires actually called these the bowler knows he is over and will adjust accordingly resulting in less wickets being taken on a no ball.

Dutchy wrote:

whufc wrote:No needs for central umpires to ajudge front foot no balls anymore, may help them deciding where the ball has pitched.

Staggers me that the 3rd umpire does not simply check every delivery and alerts the central umpires if there is a doubtful one and he needs time to review, would save the farce at Adelaide Oval where every dismissal was checked, cant blame the central umpires they are obviously told to check and be cautious...

Agree!!!!

No balls should be called right away, not in retrospect. If you sky a high one. You run half heartfelt. He catches it. You give up running and start walking to the pavilion. Later they say it's no ball and call you back. What happens to that single you never completed? Could it have cost 2 singles as you weren't running so hard? Did it cost the fielding side a run out chance as you tried to cash in on an extra single?
Where spinners are concerned the batsman can sometimes adjust his stroke for a free hit if the no ball is called early.
I therefore think they should modify the technology used for tennis line calls for cricket. As soon as that foot goes over they could have a recording of the words "NO BALL" played over a nearby speaker, the ump would hold out his hand on hearing the call so as to give a visual cue also.

The benefit with a delayed no ball call would be batsmen will treat the play as a 'live play' and will run as usual field as usual etc etc

The change of stroke to a spinner would be a very small price to pay imho if it meant central umpires were getting more lbw and caught behind decisions correct.

But if the batsman is caught at deep fine leg, they wouldn't be treating it as a live play, when in fact the ball would still be alive in the case of a no ball.

Not sure if it has been mentioned but the umpires appear to be standing way too far back when the quicks are on, how they can see the crease at all is beyond me.

However it appeared they stood closer when the spinners were on which makes you wonder why not stand close all the time so they can see if it's a No Ball.

Agree checking every wicket for a NO Ball is a bad look and takes away from the moment!

The further back you stand the less the distance (angle) your eye needs to move between looking at the line and looking where the ball pitches.
They have more time when the spinner is on (bowls slower), and as such, can stand closer.

Apparently England didn't bowl a single no-ball in Australia's second innings of 369 in Perth.

Either the Pommy bowlers were very disciplined or the umpires were lazy and didn't even check.

I know which school of thought I subscribe to.

Dutchy wrote:

whufc wrote:No needs for central umpires to ajudge front foot no balls anymore, may help them deciding where the ball has pitched.

Staggers me that the 3rd umpire does not simply check every delivery and alerts the central umpires if there is a doubtful one and he needs time to review, would save the farce at Adelaide Oval where every dismissal was checked, cant blame the central umpires they are obviously told to check and be cautious...

Have thought this for a long time.
3rd umpire watches each ball and alerts umpire through ear-piece. No-ball is called a split-second later than a "live" call, so in a wicket-taking situation it means the call comes through just as the keeper, slips and bowler are converging, rather than when the bowler is just out of his follow-through, ie a touch later but still "in the moment".
The front-foot no-ball has virtually eliminated the free-hit, so that wouldn't be an issue.
Agree that it has the potential to help the on-field umpires make better decisions, at least it is worth a try to see.

FlyingHigh wrote:

Dutchy wrote:

whufc wrote:No needs for central umpires to ajudge front foot no balls anymore, may help them deciding where the ball has pitched.

Staggers me that the 3rd umpire does not simply check every delivery and alerts the central umpires if there is a doubtful one and he needs time to review, would save the farce at Adelaide Oval where every dismissal was checked, cant blame the central umpires they are obviously told to check and be cautious...

Have thought this for a long time.
3rd umpire watches each ball and alerts umpire through ear-piece. No-ball is called a split-second later than a "live" call, so in a wicket-taking situation it means the call comes through just as the keeper, slips and bowler are converging, rather than when the bowler is just out of his follow-through, ie a touch later but still "in the moment".
The front-foot no-ball has virtually eliminated the free-hit, so that wouldn't be an issue.
Agree that it has the potential to help the on-field umpires make better decisions, at least it is worth a try to see.

The cameras on the hats of the umpires show exactly why the 3rd umpire should do the no balls - McDermott bowled a no ball which got katich out - when they showed it from umpire cam it was very hard to see with McDermott's back leg obscuring the view of the umpire

the best piece of cricket technology is the side on camera for the crease - probably the only technology which is pretty much unequivocal.

the third umpire also does nothing when the bowler is running up to bowl, surely he could just check the no balls and shout it down to the umps.

Or we could just leave it to the umpires call. 3rd umpire is fine imo but sanitizing any game completely is ridiculous. For me run outs is fair game but beyond that then get ****.

Soccer is still very intriguing and is more popular than ever. It's still a sport who hasn't been caught up too much in modern technology when it comes to to on field decisions and SURPRISE it's more popular than ever!!