Pre-dominance of incompetent English umpires on the ICC Elite Umpires Panel

[Prince EWS]

Surely it can't be that difficult

I think we're seeing evidence that it's a specialist skill tbh, especially given what RTB brought up. Some people are better at learning how to apply technicalities than others, some people are better at video analysis than others and obviously not everyone is actually proficient at cycling through the different camera angles. It really should be a specialist job IMO. I don't really think there's reason to believe there'd be lots of overlap between who the best standing umpires in the world would be and who the best TV umpires in the world would be.

 

[RossTaylorsBox]

All you need is a replay and a protractor.

 

[Senile Sentry]

Those who are seeing there is a 'conspiracy' that Indian umpires (inter alia) are under-represented in the ICC panel should've seen yesterday's SL-India match umpiring.

 

[Furball]

Suitable revenge for having to put up with Billy Bowden's incompetence and 'look at me' antics.

 

[Flem274*]

not unlike your trolling attempts

 

[cnerd123]

not unlike your trolling attempts

Tbf atleast Bowden was funny

 

[Stefan9]

No - I'll take the best umpires regardless of nationality, thanks. And all umpires have made howlers in the past, this isn't a new thing, it's just shown up more glaringly by the ever improving state of technology. The umpires are constantly rated against their peers, and if they aren't performing then they will get replaced by someone from the tier below who is better.

Now, I'm all sure we'd love to see more Asad Rauf, but that ship has sadly sailed.

They don't get dealt with fast enough. If a ref has a shocker in rugby union or football he will get benched the next game. Not in cricket, an umpire has the shocker the same guy will be involved in the next game.

For instance Cloete has had a shocking odi series vs england. Loads of terrible decision against both sides, being saved most of the time by drs but he still stood all 5 games.

 

[Day Man]

Tbf atleast Bowden was funny

He really wasn't, tbf. He was a novelty act at best, just like Navjot Singh Sidhu's commentary career.

 

[cnerd123]

He really wasn't, tbf. He was a novelty act at best, just like Navjot Singh Sidhu's commentary career.

I meant relative to Furball.

 

[91Jmay]

They don't get dealt with fast enough. If a ref has a shocker in rugby union or football he will get benched the next game. Not in cricket, an umpire has the shocker the same guy will be involved in the next game.

For instance Cloete has had a shocking odi series vs england. Loads of terrible decision against both sides, being saved most of the time by drs but he still stood all 5 games.

Yeah that Cloete was consistently terrible. His LBW against Duminy in the 2nd game was one of the worst you will see + Hales missing the ball by literally a foot, Morris the bowler not appealing at all and Cloete triggering him.

 

[Agent TBY]

That's what you get for making a former CW Black an umpire.

 

[Crazy Sam]

Bring Darrell Hair back.

 

[Biryani Pillow]

Yeah, indeed.

I was umpiring on the weekend and the fielding team lost their **** when I turned down a caught behind appeal. Bloke plays the sweep, ball lobs up and is taken. They were convinced it was glove, I had doubt in my mind and thought it was off the arm, just above the wristband of the glove. So I give it not out.

They start going crazy, cursing the quality of the umpiring. They fail to realise that a) gloved sweeps and legside strangles are the most ****ing awful decisions to have to make, b) international umpires get this **** wrong because it isn't easy, and c) there's a reason I'm not an international umpire.

The ball moves quickly and you only get one look, even at park level. Scale that up to international bowling speeds, the pressure of crowds, and higher stakes matches; it becomes pretty clear just how difficult a job umpires actually have. It's great that technology can support them and fix their errors, and things like that Voges no ball call are inexcusable even when you consider the difficulties of the job, but FMD umpires cop way more **** than they deserve.

^^^^^^^^

Best post on this thread.

I had a similar one late last season in a high pressure game that mattered to both sides. The side batting first secured enough bonus points quite early in affairs for their happiness. The side batting second were 80 short of their target (which, it turned out, they needed to get to avoid relegation) and 5 down. A wicket at this point and they probably don't have the batting to win.

I am at strikers end when the batsman (and captain) goes for a sweep. The ball hits the pad and my colleague raises his finger. The batsman slumps to the ground as he knows two things - first his team are in the deep **** and second he got a bottom edge. Luckily I have seen this and, as I am certain I approach my colleague and tell him - I note here that a bottom edge on a sweep shot is VERY easy to miss from the bowlers end. My colleague is happy to reverse his decision. The bowler, who has played FC, is aghast *I've never seen that before!" - but in the next few overs 5 of the fielding team (two of whom have also played FC) tell me I was right. The batsman suggests to me (in the heat of battle) that "he should have seen that". Afterwards I take him through the difficulties and he is content - a last over victory helping his mood. I've recently told this to three other experienced umpires. One said I was wrong to do it as, unless my colleague seeks my advice he is responsible for the decisions at his end - which technically under the Laws is correct. A second one felt it acceptable under the Laws but ethically wrong (I disagree with this - the key thing was to get the right decision. The third - who does County 2nd XI games - said he would be content with my intervention.

I would say my marks and comments by the batting captain were, perhaps unsurprisingly rather good.

To the OP.

Do you have any concept of the level of training and supervision the top umpires go through? This is not straightforward by any means and ensures a high standard at the top..

Of course, sat in your comfy armchair with slow motion, hawkeye and hotspot it's easy to toss out glib idiot terms like 'howler' but I always say - try doing a little bit of serious umpiring and you might consign such terms to the bin where they belong.

 

[Skyliner]

Yeah the "ALL ENGLISH UMPIRES ARE INCOMPETENT SHOOT THEM" sentiment in the OP is utterly ridiculous, even if he is right to point out that Llong ****ed up (I've changed my mind on that one, ftr; originally thought it was a failure of process and then they confirmed that Llong ****ed up the process too)

That's over the top. I am asking why there are 4 English umpires on the panel. The answer will be 'because they are the best in the world' and yet people are readily using the term 'inexcusable' in describing the Llong and Illingworth howlers. 'Inexcusable' does not pertain to a readily explainable or run-of-the-mill error, it pertains to error for which there is no excuse, that would give grave cause for concern. So I am challenging the notion that these are the best available umpires. I am querying as to what an umpire would need to do to be removed from the elite panel. Or are we now at a place where errors that are so bad as to be inexcusable are swept under the carpet.

Below is an article bemoaning Llong's howlers in a series involving India - also RIchard Kettleborough is mentioned as well.

Howler Alert! Umpire Nigel Llong is the new Bucknor for Team India : Cricket, News - India Today

The Llong howler which was the Lyon non-dismissal was not in isolation; he had a poor series. Yet was immediately appointed to the NZ vs Sri Lanka series.

It is absurd to suggest that I was saying all English umpires are incompetent and should be shot.
I would argue that the converse is the prevailing perception: English umpires are seen as being the best going around, and that perception does not equate to the reality. In fact some are performing poorly, and the fact that they are being defended to the ends of the earth flies in the face of the cumulative evidence.

 

[Day Man]

That's over the top. I am asking why there are 4 English umpires on the panel. The answer will be 'because they are the best in the world' and yet people are readily using the term 'inexcusable' in describing the Llong and Illingworth howlers. 'Inexcusable' does not pertain to a readily explainable or run-of-the-mill error, it pertains to error for which there is no excuse, that would give grave cause for concern. So I am challenging the notion that these are the best available umpires. I am querying as to what an umpire would need to do to be removed from the elite panel. Or are we now at a place where errors that are so bad as to be inexcusable are swept under the carpet.

Below is an article bemoaning Llong's howlers in a series involving India - also RIchard Kettleborough - is mentioned as well.

Howler Alert! Umpire Nigel Llong is the new Bucknor for Team India : Cricket, News - India Today

Is it your contention that these 4 umpires are inept to a much greater degree than the other 5 umpires who are not English?

 

[Skyliner]

Is it your contention that these 4 umpires are inept to a much greater degree than the other 5 umpires who are not English?

Not at all. I would ask by what criteria 4 umpires from one nation came to be appointed, and what it would take for one of the English umpires to be removed from the elite panel. By and large Kettleborough and Gould are pretty good, from what I have seen.

How often have you seen an elite umpire in a test match call a no-ball that wasn't one? I have never seen that before, let alone twice in the same match. Is it therefore an issue of failing eyesight, or lost confidence - the umpiring 'yips' if you will. We always get the replay of the no-balls that are called, and I have never seen that before.

A clear mark on the bat is explained away as "that could have been made by anything", in defiance of all logic. The same elite umpire see's the wrong picture and inexplicably cannot tell instantly that it's the wrong picture - see's the ball being swept off the bat!! - and states "he's not out LBW then".

That's when the term 'inexcusable' gets applied.

Are you seeing other incidents of a similar magnitude from other umpires? I mean, incidents above and beyond the normal 'he's missed a clear edge' howler.

 

[Skyliner]

Let's imagine NZ umpire Chris Gaffney calls a no-ball in the deciding Ashes test......but wait: Mitchell Starc had a huge part of his foot behind the line and Joe Root - clean bowled by the delivery & on 8 at the time - presses on for a glorious 324*.
In the next innings, Gaffney calls Jimmy Anderson for overstepping. And it is thereafter established that Anderson had a large part of his foot behind the line.
England win the test and the Ashes.
Gaffney is retained on the elite panel, and is appointed to Australia's next test series vs South Africa in Australia.

A likely scenario(?)

 

[Gnske]

A thread titled "Pre-dominance of incompetent Kiwi umpires on the ICC Elite Umpires Panel"

 

[Skyliner]

A thread titled "Predominance of incompetent Kiwi umpires on the ICC Elite Umpires Panel"

One Kiwi is hardly a predominance though. And I don't think that in such a scenario Gaffney would be on the elite panel for very long. He would be 'gone by lunch-time'.

 

[cnerd123]

One Kiwi is hardly a predominance though. And I don't think that in such a scenario Gaffney would be on the elite panel for very long. He would be 'gone by lunch-time'.

What evidence leads you to this conclusion?