Official, confirmed, verified "You are the umpire" thread

[qpeedore]

Revive this thread! I'm not the only one who thinks up scenarios. Post them.

- Two international teams have just finished a 50 over match in 30 overs total. To their credit, they play a T20 immediately afterward, for the benefit of the crowd. You, as an international umpire, have been asked to officiate. It is a match between 2 international teams. What do you say? (The match referee agrees to the T20).

 

[Yash.]

Revive this thread! I'm not the only one who thinks up scenarios. Post them.

- Two international teams have just finished a 50 over match in 30 overs total. To their credit, they play a T20 immediately afterward, for the benefit of the crowd. You, as an international umpire, have been asked to officiate. It is a match between 2 international teams. What do you say? (The match referee agrees to the T20).

I would have no problem then. But, I think, it would not be granted official status then?

 

[qpeedore]

This actually happened. A local team was playing another local team and...well, the match was over so quickly that the fans were almost on the verge of rioting (all 1000 if them...in a 18000 stadium, if it was sold out, you can guess that they didn't do much for only 1000). It was asked if they can play a T20 match to please said crowd and they did.

EDIT: I added detail to the number of fans.

Now, back to our umpiring.

Cameras all up on your hat and elbow and everything. And that damn spider cam is too low. Can you tell the TV people anything?

 

[Yash.]

I have no idea about this one. Most probably, we can't do anything

Cameras all up on your hat and elbow and everything. And that damn spider cam is too low. Can you tell the TV people anything?

 

[qpeedore]

I personally think that if you believe that as the umpire, the technology is becoming too distracting, you can request a change.

If you can't make a proper decision then that takes away from the game, not adds to it.

 

[qpeedore]

By the way, when did the thread title change from "unofficial" to "official"?

The thread was inspired by a book and this is in no way anything official. To the admins, please change it back to unofficial...I'm not about to get sued here.

 

[qpeedore]

Still pissed at whoever changed my topic title without consulting with me first. Admins/Mods, you don't get to do that. Read my very first post in the thread.

Anwyays...

Forget most of the video, the important part starts at around 35.20ish. 35.55 is the really important part.

Now it's definitely a clean catch, no questions about that.

Notice the line where the boundary rope was originally. Notice how Braithwaite tiptoed to initially catch the ball before that line, even though the actual boundary marker was about 6 inches behind the line. Notice how he threw the ball up. Notice that when he came back into play he still tiptoed to ensure he wasn't touching the original boundary line (marker be damned).

As an umpire, if the boundary ropes have moved and something similar occurs, what do you do? Say a fielder saves a ball inches away from the alleged rope but it turns out that the rope had been moved (let's say the drinks cart driver wasn't exactly sober)...the original boundary line would mean four but now...it's not.

 

[Yash.]

As an umpire, if the boundary ropes have moved and something similar occurs, what do you do? Say a fielder saves a ball inches away from the alleged rope but it turns out that the rope had been moved (let's say the drinks cart driver wasn't exactly sober)...the original boundary line would mean four but now...it's not

I’ve seen this happen in a match, between India and Australia... The commentators said, that if there isn’t a marking, which shows where the boundary line initially was, then it cannot be claimed to be a four.

However, if there is a marking, then it is a 4.

 

[qpeedore]

The commentators aren't the umpires.

If I was the TV umpire, and, agreed if there was no mark then it's not a boundary. If there was a mark then it falls under the agreed field and playing conditions at the start of the match. Therefore it's a boundary.

Which is why I think the Braithwaite catch was super intelligent because of what he did. There was clearly a mark, and he made sure to be within the Laws when he took that catch.

 

[Yash.]

The commentators aren't the umpires

Yeah of course, but still. They know more about cricket than I do

 

[NILAYSHAH60]

I’ve seen this happen in a match, between India and Australia... The commentators said, that if there isn’t a marking, which shows where the boundary line initially was, then it cannot be claimed to be a four.

However, if there is a marking, then it is a 4.

It wasn't India and Australia. It was the 2013 Champions Trophy Final between India and England. It was said by Michael Holding.

 

[NILAYSHAH60]

Still pissed at whoever changed my topic title without consulting with me first. Admins/Mods, you don't get to do that. Read my very first post in the thread.

Anwyays...

Forget most of the video, the important part starts at around 35.20ish. 35.55 is the really important part.

Now it's definitely a clean catch, no questions about that.

Notice the line where the boundary rope was originally. Notice how Braithwaite tiptoed to initially catch the ball before that line, even though the actual boundary marker was about 6 inches behind the line. Notice how he threw the ball up. Notice that when he came back into play he still tiptoed to ensure he wasn't touching the original boundary line (marker be damned).

As an umpire, if the boundary ropes have moved and something similar occurs, what do you do? Say a fielder saves a ball inches away from the alleged rope but it turns out that the rope had been moved (let's say the drinks cart driver wasn't exactly sober)...the original boundary line would mean four but now...it's not.

See if anything such happens then atleast the groundsmen or the on-field umpires should come to know about it. So it can be assumed that the rope is in the place as we can see he hasn't moved the rope not even by a centimetre. So the umpire has to give that out.

 

[qpeedore]

We often hear of the "soft signal" when we are watching cricket on TV. What is the importance of this? (Not asking because I don't know, asking you guys if YOU know...lol.)

 

[Targaryen]

We often hear of the "soft signal" when we are watching cricket on TV. What is the importance of this?

If the third umpire is not able to decide on the appeal due to different reasons like insufficient video footage, too close etc.. the soft signal comes into play.

Finally, the soft signal will be considered as the final decision in such circumstances.

 

[Yash.]

We often hear of the "soft signal" when we are watching cricket on TV. What is the importance of this?

As Pres, answered, the Soft Signal is an indication of what the on field umpires thought about the decision. It would hold if there is no conclusive evidence to overturn the soft signal