Out of form umpires? Who monitors them?

[puddleduck]

But bias as blatant as letting a guy bowl the 7th ball of the over to a no. 11 batsman at a very crucial stage?

Where was the match referee?

That's not bias it's just a mistake, I remember Hussain getting out to the 7th ball of an over once.

Regarding the question, yes the umpires do get monitored, and yes it is a very difficult job.

Some umpires also don't want to be on the ICC panel due to the travelling, Peter Willey is a very good umpire in England but doesn't want to spend his whole year travelling.

 

[harishankar]

Yeah right. So England and the English cricket fans never complain about umpiring decisions when it's against them and take them in their stride. :

 

[Almost_Austwick]

Although television coverage and replays have been around for a while I don't think we' had the same level of scrutiny of umpires in the past as we do now.

There are numerous cameras at every test which can analyse events from a number of angles, footage which can be slowed down to a single frame plus other gadgets such as snick mics and hawkeye. Plus we have the advantage of being able to watch a single delivery many times without someone appealing in our face.

What does the umpire have but normal human senses? Add in to that other factors such as player pressure, standing for a long day, crowd noise etc and you're bound to get errors. As someone else mentioned it's human nature.

In general I'd probably say that the level of umpiring is roughly the same as it has always been (if not slightly better) it's just that every decision is analysed like never before and the mistakes highlighted. Then there is the debate over walking but that is another topic altogether.

The most crucial thing is that luck generally evens out so for every bad decision against you'll probably get one in your favour. Ok, maybe it won't be in the same match or even the same series but somewhere down the line it'll come back around.

 

[puddleduck]

Yeah right. So England and the English cricket fans never complain about umpiring decisions when it's against them and take them in their stride. :

I'm sure some of them do as do fans of every nation, but I know I don't, you'll never see my complaining about decisions in any thread on this board unless they are truely appaling, and even then I will say that at the end of the day it is up the team to keep creating chances, or in the batsmans case score runs when they get any luck.

Not really sure what the point of your post is? Are you trying to say that because other people complain about umpires that's why you do it?

The point to my post is that whilst mistakes are made, to claim it is bias is missing the point entirely. If you were in charge of a delivery company and someone made a mistake regarding a delivery is it bias that the person was forgotten? No it is a mistake, and as much as people like to believe otherwise, we as human beings are not perfect. (in some cases not even close.. no names mentioned *cough* Evo * cough * )

As Austwick has said before me, it is all an element of guesswork when you are in the middle. I can guarentee that the controversy that some fans seem intent on creating regarding decisions would be almost non-existant if things like hawk-eye, snicko, and slow motion replays were not available. At the same time the game would be lacking in terms of the armchair fan as they help to provide us with more insight into what we are watching.

 

[anandbatra]

But, why did Rauf get it wrong, and especially Dravid/Sachin, not once, but several times. You can understand one or two bad decisions. But, 4-5 appalling decisions(watch the replays) at very crucial stages doesn't quite convince me. I also don't think it is bias; it is a case of poor umpiring and bad umpire selection policies of the ICC. If you show me a better judge of spin bowling than AV Jayaprakash, I'd change my name.

After all this, they say there aren't good enough umpires from India to be on the elite panel. Well, if the umpiring standards of this match are any indicator, then the umpire of my local cricket club will do a better job. He can at least count! You can't discount the fact that India could have scored 20 more and won the match had the umpires/scorers not made such a blunder.

To add to it, there was the Sachin drama at the start of the day, where he wasn't allowed to bat before 10:48 am, and this was communicated to the Indian team just as Sachin was coming out to bat. I'm sorry, but this is truly appalling.

 

[aditya123]

That's not bias it's just a mistake, I remember Hussain getting out to the 7th ball of an over once.

Regarding the question, yes the umpires do get monitored, and yes it is a very difficult job.

Some umpires also don't want to be on the ICC panel due to the travelling, Peter Willey is a very good umpire in England but doesn't want to spend his whole year travelling.

I agree with anandbatra on this.

The umpiring has been quit poor indeed and it is the Indian top-order that has had to bear the brunt of it.
Especially, when the teams are invlved in such a close test match, every bad decision can be costly.

One can at least forgive them for the wrong decisions but to allow a 7-ball over in test cricket in a situation where 10-15 runs could be vital is appauling.
You do not need technology to count 6 balls correctly.
And Kaarthik was batting superbly as well.

The scorer must be sacked if indeed the game turns out to be a win or SA by a close margin.

 

[nightprowler10]

As has been mentioned before, 7 ball overs happen ALL THE TIME. Usually umpires make up for it by having that bowler bowl a 5 ball over. Its a relatively easy mistake to make considering how many things the umpires have to watch. Its not fair to use this as an excuse to bash the umpires. That said, I'll agree that the standard of umpiring has been quite poor in this series.

 

[m_vaughan]

The umpiring has been quit poor indeed and it is the Indian top-order that has had to bear the brunt of it.
Especially, when the teams are invlved in such a close test match, every bad decision can be costly.

Extremely lame excuse is all I can say.

 

[aussie1st]

Obviously the ICC monitor an umpires performance hence the reason we have the elite panel. If an umpire is out of form he'll get dropped from the panel.

 

[sohum]

As has been mentioned before, 7 ball overs happen ALL THE TIME. Usually umpires make up for it by having that bowler bowl a 5 ball over. Its a relatively easy mistake to make considering how many things the umpires have to watch. Its not fair to use this as an excuse to bash the umpires. That said, I'll agree that the standard of umpiring has been quite poor in this series.

I'm not quite sure they balance it with 5 ball overs... Nixon?

 

[nightprowler10]

I'm not quite sure they balance it with 5 ball overs... Nixon?

Well its been done. Below is the link to the match where Anwar scored his 194. Note at the bottom of the page where it says:

# Pakistan innings: 1x7 ball over (37th over - Kumble's 6th over)
# Pakistan innings: 1x5 ball over (49th over - Tendulkar's 9th over). Both allowed by umpire Francis.

So its been done (apparently by a different bowler, perhaps when the umpire discovered his mistake?), although I'll admit I'm not sure about the 'usual' part.

http://www.cricinfo.com/db/ARCHIVE/1996-97/OD_TOURNEYS/IC-IND/PAK_IND_IC-IND_ODI6_21MAY1997.html

 

[sohum]

Well its been done. Below is the link to the match where Anwar scored his 194. Note at the bottom of the page where it says:



So its been done (apparently by a different bowler, perhaps when the umpire discovered his mistake?), although I'll admit I'm not sure about the 'usual' part.

http://www.cricinfo.com/db/ARCHIVE/1996-97/OD_TOURNEYS/IC-IND/PAK_IND_IC-IND_ODI6_21MAY1997.html

I have a feeling that is more a case of the umpire making similar mistakes twice. As they say, two wrongs don't make a right.

Also, the footnote "Both allowed by umpire Francis" may suggest that Francis was bad enough to not catch it twice.

 

[puddleduck]

I would think if that was the case it would only be important to do it in an ODI.

 

[sohum]

I would think if that was the case it would only be important to do it in an ODI.

You'd be running into a bucket of problems, though. What if that 6th ball was the last ball of the innings, and they had 2 runs to get? If the umpire allowed a 5-baller to compensate for the 7-baller, I think it was purely to allow for some closure in his head.

 

[puddleduck]

I actually don't think they do make up the difference, was just saying that if they do then it would only be in a odi where it would make a difference as such and be necessary to do it.