Print

Please post once and this message will disappear! Introduce yourself, say hello, jump into a discussion...

[ruchir]

If what Taufel is saying below is really true then I have a tough time understanding it. Kumble gets less LBW in his favor because he bowls faster than Warne??? Is that the new logic now?? One who bowls slower gets more LBWs??

By that logic, Akhtar, Lee, Bond, Edwards etc. should not get any LBWs given because they bowl extreemly fast. In fact, any bowler who bowls as fast or faster than Kumble should not be given any LBW decision in his favor.

So are the umpires of today saying that they don't have the capabilities of judging an LBW appeal is the bowler is bowling on or above Kumble's bowling speed?? That's news to me.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://cricket.indiatimes.com/articleshow/1682170.cms

'Umpires unsure when Kumble appeals'

PTI
DUBAI, June 26: Veteran Indian leg-spinner Anil Kumble bowls quicker than his Australian counterpart Shane Warne leading to refusal of a number of leg before decisions in his favour, according to ICC's Elite Umpire Simon Taufel.

Taufel made an interesting observation as to why Warne was more successful in trapping batsmen lbw with his straight delivery while Kumble did not.

"Warne tends to bowl a lot slower and hence it is easier for umpires to form their opinion. Kumble on the other hand hits the bat a lot quicker and hence sometimes the umpires can't be that sure," Taufel was quoted as saying in the 'Khaleej Times' today.

According to a report in the paper, Kumble appeared extremely cut up with umpire Brian Jerling for refusing a number of leg before decisions during the third Test against the West Indies currently being played in St Kitts.

The report also said West Indies players have expressed resentment at the number of leg before wicket decisions that have gone against the hosts in the on going series against India. There have been 13 lbw dismissals against the Caribbeans in the series so far.

West Indian captain Brian Lara, who has been trapped lbw in his last four innings, said the reason behind it could be because the Indians tend to bowl their deliveries within the stumps while his players prefer the "corridor on and around the off-stump".

[Aloo Kashmiri Ul Haq]

Ruchir
From what I understand Taufel was comparing spinners and their LBW appeals (if not then his argument of Kumble not getting LBWs in his favor would be wrong). With a slower bowler like Warne, Taufel gets more time to study the path of the ball. Does that mean that a slower ball would go onto hit the stumps is contentious.

[OldPal]

We should be happy he was not fined for over appealing   

Just tryingt o find the positive side of it 

[ruchir]

DY: That I understand, that he is comparing Kumble and Warne. I also get it that with Warne being slower, it gives umpires more time to study the path.

But look at it this way. With Brett Lee bowling at about 95MPH and swinging and seaming the ball, how much time would that give the umpires to study the path of the ball? Lee and Akhtar do get LBWs, don't they? So how come umpires are able to judge the path when they are bowling at about 2 times the speed of Kumble?

Sometimes, during a fast bowler's over, the video shows the "reaction time" from the moment ball leaves the bowler's hand and strikes the bat. Usually it is about .5 second. Yet, the umpires are able to make a judgment on LBWs. For a spinner, the reaction time would be around 1 second or more (if flighted). That gives umpire more time to judge.

What I don't understand is the difference in difficulty of judgment between a spinner and a pacer. For a spinner, either the ball spins or doesn't. For a pacer, the ball can swing and seam in the same delivery. In my opinion, giving LBWs to pacers should be more difficult because to the speed at which the ball is travelling and what it can do in the air and after pitching. So, if umpires don't find the speed as a factor in deciding LBWs for pacers, how can they find it for spinners, who are slower.

[pieterSAN]

Ruchir,

Maybe it has to do with batpad situations. With those quicker balls it is harder to tell whether the ball might have taken bat then pad or pad then bat. I think quick bowlers usually have an advantage because batsman play with bat in front of pad.

[ruchir]

Ruchir,

Maybe it has to do with batpad situations. With those quicker balls it is harder to tell whether the ball might have taken bat then pad or pad then bat. I think quick bowlers usually have an advantage because batsman play with bat in front of pad.

Hhmmm... maybe, but I thought for bat-pad situations, umpires always relied on which sound they heard first, the THUD of the pad or the CLICK of the bat.

And if we look at T2, then there were hardly any bat-pad cases where the appeal was refused. Most times it was bat BEHIND the pad and Jerling found some unknown reason to deny the appeal.

[RicePlateReddy]

West Indian captain Brian Lara, who has been trapped lbw in his last four innings, said the reason behind it could be because the Indians tend to bowl their deliveries within the stumps while his players prefer the "corridor on and around the off-stump".

Wow, that is a refreshing thing to see - a captain at the receiving end providing a justification for an imbalance in LBW decisions that hurt his team. Applause for Lara.