What's the worst umpiring decision you've ever seen? [Archive]

wagstaff

29 Dec 2002, 19:07

Following on from the thread about the Trescothick LBW shocker, what is the worst umpiring decision you've seen at international and domestic level?

- One that stands out was in a domestic one-dayer involving Tasmania where a Tassie medium-pacer bowled a delivery to a batsman who was backing away from his stumps and, noticing this, darted it in towards his pads. It went between the stumps and the batsman's legs yet the umpire called it a wide! David Boon wasn't happy with that decision I can assure you.

- Another one was the infamous Dean Jones run out in the West Indies in 1991, when he was bowled off a no-ball, didn't hear the call and walked off the ground. In the meantime, the Windies players took a stump out of the ground and Jones was out of his crease. However, as he wasn't going for a run the umpire should've stated it was a dead ball.

- On Australia's tour of Sri Lanka in 1999, the Sri Lankans were chasing a modest target for victory and had lost a few wickets. Colin Miller bowled an arm ball that Arjuna Rantaunga didn't pick and he let it his pad without playing a shot. It would've surely hit middle stump but the umpire didn't give it. I remember Warne's comment from slip after the decision was given, "That was f***ing plumb"!

Jaymin

29 Dec 2002, 19:13

Another one was the infamous Dean Jones run out in the West Indies in 1991, when he was bowled off a no-ball, didn't hear the call and walked off the ground. In the meantime, the Windies players took a stump out of the ground and Jones was out of his crease. However, as he wasn't going for a run the umpire should've stated it was a dead ball.

Thats an interesting one....

In one of our local games a couple of weeks ago....we had a player batting with a runner....

He was batting....played a leg glance and the runner and non striker completed a single. The batsman then walked out to square leg but was slightly out of his crease...the keeper broke the stumps and appealed.

Now i'm pretty sure it states somewhere that the batsman must stay in his crease the whole time but if he wasn't attempting a run....should he have been adjudged out?

The incident led to one of the fielders laying several punches into our batsmans head as well....but thats another story...

bragg

30 Dec 2002, 20:17

Benny ...............OUT ...sorry Keepers union have to back him up

scmods

30 Dec 2002, 21:00

The worst ever umpiring decision was the one to let them refer catches to the third umpire.

bragg

30 Dec 2002, 21:33

The " stumping " of Brian Lara .............

Kenny_01

30 Dec 2002, 21:37

Boon given out to Tufnell.

Run out of Gilchrist.

Booze Hound

30 Dec 2002, 21:40

Originally posted by Jaymin
Thats an interesting one....

In one of our local games a couple of weeks ago....we had a player batting with a runner....

He was batting....played a leg glance and the runner and non striker completed a single. The batsman then walked out to square leg but was slightly out of his crease...the keeper broke the stumps and appealed.

Now i'm pretty sure it states somewhere that the batsman must stay in his crease the whole time but if he wasn't attempting a run....should he have been adjudged out?

The incident led to one of the fielders laying several punches into our batsmans head as well....but thats another story...

In this case the umpire decided correctly. I had a similar situation in a League match a few seasons back, one of the fielding side also knew the Law and reacted very quickly (it could also apply if the runner had been stood out of his ground when the ball had been played, or left, by the striker). Had the stumps been broken at the bowlers end it would not have been out.

Re the Dean Jones incident.

At the time the ruling was correct, the batsman was out (I also saw it happen in a ODI). Since then the Law has been changed and a batsman who leaves his crease under the missaprehension that he is out and, as a result, is 'dismissed' should continue his innings.

Booze Hound

30 Dec 2002, 21:46

Further to the above, you are probably getting confused with the part of the 'Run Out' Law which states:

"The striker can only be given run out off a no-ball if attempting a run" (My italics).

Basically, when you have a runner, both he and the injured batsman must obey the Laws of the game at all times.

Booze Hound

30 Dec 2002, 21:48

DaveW

30 Dec 2002, 21:49

Originally posted by Booze Hound

Re the Dean Jones incident.

At the time the ruling was correct, the batsman was out (I also saw it happen in a ODI). Since then the Law has been changed and a batsman who leaves his crease under the missaprehension that he is out and, as a result, is 'dismissed' should continue his innings.
No, I'm pretty sure you're wrong. (like the umpire)

This episode seems to come up a lot in coverage amoungst Australian cricket commentators, who all acknowledge it was a bad decision. Even today it was discussed as Steve Waugh started walking after being caught off a no-ball. And I know that Dean Jones is still sour about it.

The incident happened in 1991. The 1980 code says this: (which as far as I can tell is the last revision before 2000)

5. Batsman Leaving his Wicket under a Misapprehension
The umpires shall intervene if satisfied that a batsman, not having been given out, has left his wicket under a misapprehension that he has been dismissed.

http://www-aus.cricket.org/link_to_database/SOCIETIES/ENG/ACS/CRICKET_HISTORY/LAWS/LAWS_1980_CODE/1980_LAW_27.html

Dipper

30 Dec 2002, 23:25

When England went to Pakistan in 1987, you may remember that Gatting & Shoor Rana the umpire had that finger wagging incident(which incidently & outragously meant that we missed a days play while the umpire waited for an apology in game we had a good chance of winning-it ended drawn) but the build up to this was the first Test, England were absolutely raped by the umpires, there was some bad blood between the sides anyway & we all know how much the Pakis like to cheat but I've never seen anything like this I reckoned at the time that about 12 of the 20 England wickets that fell in that game weren't out, there was more than one incident where the spinners bowled & the ball clearly beat the outside edge the fielders went up & the umpire gave it out.
I particularly remember a Graham Gooch dismissal, the left arm spinner Qasim bowled to him from round the wicket & the ball pitched outside off stump & span away, Goochie put his pad in the way & the ball hit the middle of the pad & bounced to the silly mid off fielder who caught it.They all appealed & the umpire gave it out, there was I thinking Geez that's a bloody disgraceful LBW decision it was missing by miles, when I realised that they'd given the catch, yes they must have changed the rules to give people out caught off the pad because his bat was nowhere near the ball at any point, it was disgraceful but not the worst decision of the game but it's just the one I remember most clearly.Chris Broad got so annoyed with the whole thing that when the umpire gave him out for something as equally obscene he just refused to go a la WG Grace & just stood his ground for ages in the end Gooch had to wander up to him & tell him that he's be better off heading back to the pavillion.

Booze Hound

30 Dec 2002, 23:27

1980 was the last major revision before 2000.

There were a number of revisions to single laws in between, often just in the wording or guidance to umpires, but sometimes changing a whole sub-section. This particular amendment came in around 1994.

There have already been a couple of minor amendments following the 2000 revision.

Bob_vic

31 Dec 2002, 00:43

Originally posted by Jaymin
Thats an interesting one....

In one of our local games a couple of weeks ago....we had a player batting with a runner....

He was batting....played a leg glance and the runner and non striker completed a single. The batsman then walked out to square leg but was slightly out of his crease...the keeper broke the stumps and appealed.

Now i'm pretty sure it states somewhere that the batsman must stay in his crease the whole time but if he wasn't attempting a run....should he have been adjudged out?

The way you describe it, technically, the batsman is out and they get no runs.

If they completed the single, then the batsman walked out to square leg, the umpire would have to decide whether it was dead ball before he was out of his ground.

You are only not out not attempting a run, if it is a no-ball and the wicketkeeper has directly broken the stumps. (Not out stumped or run out.)

If the batsman with a runner is not on strike, ie. out at square leg, the batsman is immune from being run out. He does not have to stand behind the crease, but umpires usually tell the player to anyway, to prevent the fielding side from appealling under misapprehension, by not knowing the rules.

Bob

JUBJUB

2 Jan 2003, 20:55

Originally posted by wagstaff
Following on from the thread about the Trescothick LBW shocker, what is the worst umpiring decision you've seen at international and domestic level?

Late nomination

Mark Butcher today when on 95.He was caught by Hayden,but given not out.

dr nick

3 Jan 2003, 08:24

even though darrell hair features in about 6 of my top 10 worst umpiring decisions of all time, by far and away the worst was off my bowling. unfortunately in 5th grade you get some umpires who dont have the slightest clue, and playing St. George there was a Sri Lankan ump at the end which i was bowling.

I bowled this beauty of an off cutter which i thought pretty much had the batsman trapped in front, but the umpire gave it not out. as i usually do, i asked the umpire what was wrong with my appeal. to my disbelief, the reason he gave the batsman not out is not because he thought the ball was going down leg side or anything, he actually said he thought it was going on to hit the stumps. he gave the batsman the benefit of the doubt because he thought i overstepped and bowled a no-ball. he didn't call a no-ball of course, because he 'thought' my foot was behind the line, but there was doubt in his mind that i did overstep so apparantly he had no option but to rule not out.

:mad: :mad: :mad:

red+black

3 Jan 2003, 10:01

Originally posted by nicko18
even though darrell hair features in about 6 of my top 10 worst umpiring decisions of all time, by far and away the worst was off my bowling. unfortunately in 5th grade you get some umpires who dont have the slightest clue, and playing St. George there was a Sri Lankan ump at the end which i was bowling.

I bowled this beauty of an off cutter which i thought pretty much had the batsman trapped in front, but the umpire gave it not out. as i usually do, i asked the umpire what was wrong with my appeal. to my disbelief, the reason he gave the batsman not out is not because he thought the ball was going down leg side or anything, he actually said he thought it was going on to hit the stumps. he gave the batsman the benefit of the doubt because he thought i overstepped and bowled a no-ball. he didn't call a no-ball of course, because he 'thought' my foot was behind the line, but there was doubt in his mind that i did overstep so apparantly he had no option but to rule not out.

:mad: :mad: :mad:

one of ur better posts of the past 24 hours. good work. and i think the ball was missing leg anyway.

dr nick

3 Jan 2003, 10:06

Originally posted by red+black
one of ur better posts of the past 24 hours. good work. and i think the ball was missing leg anyway.
i would have been ok with it if he just said it was missing leg.

red+black

3 Jan 2003, 10:22

it was probably that tiffen guy

dr nick

3 Jan 2003, 10:28

Originally posted by red+black
it was probably that tiffen guy

he was sri lankan, but just as dodgy

wagstaff

7 Jan 2003, 23:11

I'll nominate one from tonight's 'exhibition' one-dayer.

Umpire Steve Davis doesn't call for the 3rd Umpire on a run-out call even though it was shown that Aravinda De Silva was out of his crease and should've been out!

I know there's a tendency sometimes for umpires to call the 3rd umpire when there's no real need to but I'd much rather that then not calling them when they are required.

JUBJUB

8 Jan 2003, 08:45

Originally posted by wagstaff
I'll nominate one from tonight's 'exhibition' one-dayer.

Umpire Steve Davis doesn't call for the 3rd Umpire on a run-out call even though it was shown that Aravinda De Silva was out of his crease and should've been out!

That was bad,so its lucky De Silva didn't make many more runs.

wagstaff

8 Jan 2003, 19:58

Originally posted by JUBJUB
That was bad,so its lucky De Silva didn't make many more runs.

He was lucky that it wasn't a Test match, or a one-day international, or a tour one-dayer, or a match that actually meant anything.

Funnily enough, the exact same thing happened the last time Sri Lanka played at the Adelaide Oval four seasons ago in the infamous one-dayer against England when Murali was called for throwing.

Jayawardene should've been run-out but the umpire didn't call for the replay.

And that umpire was Ross Emerson, the same one who called Murali for throwing and never umpired an international match again.

GhostofJimJess

8 Jan 2003, 21:08

Worst decision I've seen is an LBW on Sachin Tendulkar off the bowling of Glenn McGrath in Australia about 3 or 4 years back. Tendulkar attempted to duck a bouncer which kept a bit low and hit him in the shoulder. Apart from the fact that the side-on shot showed the ball was clearly going at least a foot over the stumps, it was totally against the spirit of the game. The poor old ump - I think it was Hair - was completely sucked in by the excitement of the crowd baying for blood just before stumps ....

scmods

8 Jan 2003, 22:06

Originally posted by GhostofJimJess
Worst decision I've seen is an LBW on Sachin Tendulkar off the bowling of Glenn McGrath in Australia about 3 or 4 years back. Tendulkar attempted to duck a bouncer which kept a bit low and hit him in the shoulder. Apart from the fact that the side-on shot showed the ball was clearly going at least a foot over the stumps, it was totally against the spirit of the game. The poor old ump - I think it was Hair - was completely sucked in by the excitement of the crowd baying for blood just before stumps ....
"kept a bit low"??

it didn't bounce at all! the side on view showed the ball at about top of stump height, and on it's way down again.

And why is it against the spirit of the game? LBW applies to any part of the body, not just the leg!

dr nick

9 Jan 2003, 05:06

Originally posted by scmods
"kept a bit low"??

it didn't bounce at all! the side on view showed the ball at about top of stump height, and on it's way down again.

And why is it against the spirit of the game? LBW applies to any part of the body, not just the leg!

exactly!! that ball was no way going a foot over the stumps. worst umpiring decision?? heck that's one of the few he's got right. the side on view showed it perfectly. as you know when tendulkar ducks he gets extremely low, so the ball that hit him kept very low. the side on view showed it hit him about 2-3 cm under the level height of the bails and if anything the ball was on the way down.

spirit of the game.... thats a good one :p

wagstaff

9 Jan 2003, 20:40

It's sad that there's been plenty of fresh opportunities to add to this thread but Russel Tiffin's two non-LBW's tonight were absolute shockers.

Both were Jayasuriya bowling to Brett Lee, and the only question one could have about them was which one was plumber. I'd say the second one which was going to hit middle stump, while the other one was going to hit 1 millimetre away from middle.

It's actually pretty sad to watch really.

JUBJUB

9 Jan 2003, 21:00

Originally posted by wagstaff
It's sad that there's been plenty of fresh opportunities to add to this thread but Russel Tiffin's two non-LBW's tonight were absolute shockers.

Both were Jayasuriya bowling to Brett Lee,

I thought there was also a Maher one as well. [maybe it was the other ump].
There was a shocker when Tiffin didn't give one of the Sri Lankan openers out LBW.I think he may have been told too keep the gun in the holster.

GhostofJimJess

9 Jan 2003, 21:06

You only saw two, wagstaff ... Vaughn and Langer must have been tearing their hair out (not Daryl , either!!)

As for the spirit of the game, I was implying that an umpire should not be swayed by the baying of the crowd, nor should they give the benefit of the doubt to the bowler, especially when the ball pitch well in the bowler's half. The pitch that day was completely f**cked, so the bowlers didn't need any extra assistance from the umps ...

wagstaff

9 Jan 2003, 21:12

Originally posted by JUBJUB
I thought there was also a Maher one as well. [maybe it was the other ump].
There was a shocker when Tiffin didn't give one of the Sri Lankan openers out LBW.I think he may have been told too keep the gun in the holster.

Only saw the end of Sri Lankan's innings so can't really comment on that.

But Simon Taufel's non-decision against Maher wasn't much better; the only saving grace was that Sri Lanka had the game in the bag and with the way Maher was playing the spinners, he wasn't going to last much longer anyway.

DaveW

9 Jan 2003, 22:35

Originally posted by GhostofJimJess
Worst decision I've seen is an LBW on Sachin Tendulkar off the bowling of Glenn McGrath in Australia about 3 or 4 years back. Tendulkar attempted to duck a bouncer which kept a bit low and hit him in the shoulder. Apart from the fact that the side-on shot showed the ball was clearly going at least a foot over the stumps, it was totally against the spirit of the game. The poor old ump - I think it was Hair - was completely sucked in by the excitement of the crowd baying for blood just before stumps ....
I'm almost certain the umpire was Daryl Harper there. And I agree with what other people have said. It was a rather short bouncer that kept very low and had already reached its peak and was falling into the stumps by the time it struck Tendulkar.

As for worst (non-)decision ever, agree with the Jayasuriya to Lee one. Doesn't get much plumber than that. Tiffin was obviously stung by the media criticism after the Test.

Dipper

10 Jan 2003, 02:09

Originally posted by wagstaff
Only saw the end of Sri Lankan's innings so can't really comment on that.

But Simon Taufel's non-decision against Maher wasn't much better; the only saving grace was that Sri Lanka had the game in the bag and with the way Maher was playing the spinners, he wasn't going to last much longer anyway.

I don't know if you'd agree but for me a decision where an umpire doesn't give an LBW however plumb is never as bad a decision as one where a batsman is given out when he is not ie the LBW to a ball pitching outside leg.

We still have the benefit of the doubt in the laws of cricket(not that you'd notice lately) so I never complain to much with the ones(LBs anyway) that aren't given.

Anyway what do you think?

DaveW

10 Jan 2003, 08:20

Originally posted by DIPPER
I don't know if you'd agree but for me a decision where an umpire doesn't give an LBW however plumb is never as bad a decision as one where a batsman is given out when he is not ie the LBW to a ball pitching outside leg.

We still have the benefit of the doubt in the laws of cricket(not that you'd notice lately) so I never complain to much with the ones(LBs anyway) that aren't given.

Anyway what do you think?
That seemed to be Tiffin's attitude in last night's one-dayer...