If somebody were to do some statistical research on LBW decisions since the beginning of professional cricket, I have no doubt in my mind that it would be found that around 50% of LBW decisions were erroneous or could have gone either way.
I have probably read/heard the following thousand times - “The Umpire raised the finger though the ball appeared to be missing the leg stump” - or some variant of that.
In the current Eng-Aus game, at least 2 LBW decisions against Australia(1st innings) were clearly wrong. Who knows, it may have had a bearing on the result of the game.
That brings up the question - If so many LBW decisions are error-prone, how come we continue to accept it.
Just because we do not have the technology yet to accurately make LBW decisions, does it mean that we continue to live with crucial and sometimes result-changing wrong LBW decisions.
Already the format of the one-day game(not to talk of 20Twenty) is such that an element of “tukka”(fluke) is inbuilt. We just found out that it is possible for BD to beat Australia on a given day. Add to that error-prone LBW decisions.
I sometimes feel that between teams of more or less equal paper-strength, luck (more than strategy/planning) decides the outcome in most matches (esp one-dayers). I know many of you will disagree…lets hear your reasoning.
Re: Error prone LBW decisions - How come we continue to live with it ?
"Ricky Ponting continues to believe that (unlike ghosts) the lbw law simply doesn't exist. And Andrew Symonds has to work out how to get his hip flask onto the field without the Sky cameras noticing."
Re: Error prone LBW decisions - How come we continue to live with it ?
This from today’s Eng-Aus play :
The obdurate Katich brought up his eighth Test fifty soon after, but his 183-ball 59 came to an end in contentious circumstances when Harmison’s lbw appeal was upheld despite the ball pitching well outside leg-stump and looking too high.
Exactly what I mean. Who knows…Katich’s wicket may have cost Australia the match since they ended just 3 wickets short…see what I am saying.
Re: Error prone LBW decisions - How come we continue to live with it ?
^ I am quite sure that aussies will exploit those decisions to justify their defeat BUT they will NOT mention the LBW (as well as other dodgy decisions) going their way during last decade (specially at home)
Though I am of the view that there is a need of technology in LBW decisions.
Re: Error prone LBW decisions - How come we continue to live with it ?
^The school of thought that - since wrong decisions go against both sides so it evens the playing field - is erroneous and needs to be nipped in the bud.
In a given match, more often than not its one side which pays more than the other side in terms of wrong decisions(I am only talking LBWs here). I am not saying that Ponting can use this as an excuse. Just that LBWs, by design, bring a "destiny factor" or the "hand of God factor" to the game of cricket.
In soccer, you have once-in-a-while situation where Maradona will hand punch the ball into the goal without the referee noticing(yes...Hand of God and all), but in Cricket Umpiring errors in making LBW decisions are a norm and seem to occur in every single match. It almost seems like the cricketing world has decided to live with it - since nothing can be done about it.
Re: Error prone LBW decisions - How come we continue to live with it ?
I dont see why we dont have the technology to accurately judge lbw decisions. We already have Hawk Eye which is still currently used as an analysis tool rather than a decision making one.
More cameras can be installed which record every fine movement and change in direction of the ball, up to say 100 frames per second. Very doable.
Also it is time cricket balls were embedded with microchips and a few sensors that relay information direct to the umpire. To make things more interesting, similar sensors could be installed in the bat and the batsman's pads, to help solve the ever so confusing bat pad decisions.
And last but not lease, with all these technologies in place, hand over the LBW decision making to 3rd umpire.
As far as implementing these technologies, i dont think money is a factor anymore.
Re: Error prone LBW decisions - How come we continue to live with it ?
I am not very well-informed about the reliability of the hawk-eye . But I feel if there is a technology out there, let us try it...even if that means the task of the on-field Umpires reduces to just counting balls and checking wides/no-balls. Come to think of it, even that can be replaced by off-field technology.
Re: Error prone LBW decisions - How come we continue to live with it ?
^Your signature reminded me : Written on a public urinal in Mumbai: Aapki kismat aapke haath mein hai
I think a mechanism can be developed whereby the role of the on-field Umpire is only to decide when to refer decision to the TV Umpire and when not to. The TV Umpire will basically make all decisions. The bowler can appeal to the on-field Umpire.....and we need just one on-field Umpire. Outrageous as it may seem now, I see Cricket being played this way 10-15 years hence.
Re: Error prone LBW decisions - How come we continue to live with it ?
Exactly, I think the Aussies deserve everything they get and more. Any team visiting Australia has a terrible time with decisions. Not just lbw’s, but even snicks and runouts! If anyone can remember Pakistan’s series, they know what I am talking about.
Ideally, we should be using Hawkeye and the 3rd umpire whenever there is any doubt. That’s a lot more important than adding stupid rules like power plays and super subs.
Re: Error prone LBW decisions - How come we continue to live with it ?
When Pakistan last toured Oz, we got screwed pretty hard for LBW's and all kinds of contentious decisions. Thats what happens when you are a dominating team, the umpires favour you. I'm more than happy to see the Aussies getting hit back for once.
Re: Error prone LBW decisions - How come we continue to live with it ?
If you contrast this with baseball, the call for strikezone is even more subjective, with pretty much each umpire doing his own thing. Stuff like this happens when you have critical decisions in the hands of a human being. I am all for technology and Hawk-eye and snick-o-meter and other fancy stuff that is developed, to get as correct a decision as possible in a timely manner. However, with things like LBW, there may always be a snicker of mistake no matter what. Lets just hope to minimize them as much as possible.
