Some things that really annoy me!!!

[Wallaby]

I always hought one of the problems with calling no-balls was that the line was white and bowlers boots are usually white.
Paint the line flouro pink or green - if the line aint fully cut, it's a no ball. Easier to see.

Now - leg byes. AAAAAARGHHHHHH!

 

[Partridge]

My thoughts on this are that I couldn't disagree more.

He's got blokes charging in, often pushing the line to the mm, and he only has a split second to make the call because he then has to look up to make a decision at the other end of the wicket. Again in a split second.

Your bolded statement is extremely harsh in my view.

Which is exactly why the front foot no-ball rule was seen as a knee jerk reaction at the time and makes the umpire's job far more difficult than it needs to be.

 

[Partridge]

Cricket umpires at the highest level are basically (imo) getting paid to do nothing.

No ball? **** it, we'll use a replay.
Check the front foot after a replay? Yep, use a replay.
Boundary? Yep, we'll check that with 500 replays.

May as well not have a guy standing there, and just use technology and delay the game by a good minute or two every time something happens.

You forgot one pioneered by Steve Bucknor for appeals........

Bowler (particularly blond legspinners): Howzat?????
Umpire: Not out.
Bowler: Why not?
Umpire: Well it was just missing leg.
Bowler: You sure, it was about to do a giant parabola, it's my new mystery ball.
Umpire: You've convinced me, it's out.
Batsman: You're nodding at me, what the hell does that mean?
Umpire: It means you're out.
Batsman: So why didn't you raise your finger?
Umpire: Yep glad you understand. He's a great bowler isn't he?

Of course, if umpires had testicles or a backbone, you could stop it at step three with the umpire saying "Because I said so, now shut up and bowl".

 

[Partridge]

While we are at it, we should also ban helmets and other extra protective gears and go back to how it was years ago.

We should. I'd love to see modern batsmen use their technique of turning their head away from the ball without something protecting their head. Seeing as they don't want to use the big lump of wood in their hands.

Serves them right.

 

[Adelaide Hawk]

We should. I'd love to see modern batsmen use their technique of turning their head away from the ball without something protecting their head. Seeing as they don't want to use the big lump of wood in their hands.

Serves them right.

I've been saying this for some time. I've never seen batsmen hit in the head as much since they started wearing helmets. They are taking their eye off the ball thinking they are protected by the helmet, but it can still cause damage. I still recall with great mirth Danny Morrison on the front foot head butting the ball with his helmet. Classic.

 

[Partridge]

I've been saying this for some time. I've never seen batsmen hit in the head as much since they started wearing helmets. They are taking their eye off the ball thinking they are protected by the helmet, but it can still cause damage. I still recall with great mirth Danny Morrison on the front foot head butting the ball with his helmet. Classic.

Precisely. There's footage on the West Indies DVD of Holding bowling bouncers to Brian Close in 1976. The funny thing, despite Close's age, and not wearing a helmet (or anything else), he actually watches the ball the whole way. Imagine that.

I still remember the early 80s before helmets were worn by every single player. A batsman would get hit in the head once a season. Maybe. Now it's once a session.

 

[Adelaide Hawk]

I have often been annoyed by the run out where the batsmen smashes the ball down the pitch and it deflects from the bowler's hand onto the stumps with a batsman backing up (as we are all instructed to do). Most are pure fluke, but on occasion I have seen a bowler deliberately deflecting a ball onto the stumps, so it's not something we can remove from the game.

Like a lot of others, standing around waiting to see if a ball was a no-ball after a sensational dismissal, it leaves me cold. The whole DRS system has me cold to he honest. The system should be taken from the players and left up to the umpires. If an umpire requires a replay, then he can request one from the TV umpire. The only reservation with this is I can see every appeal being referred just to "make certain", like the no-balls, which would be even more annoying. If they wish to leave it up to the captains, then only 1 referral, and that is it. After all, it is only meant to be for the shocker decision, not a 50/50.

My pet hate in cricket .... slow over rates. Should be bowling at least 16 overs per hour, no excuse not to be. Just get on with the damned game!!!!

 

[evdo1706]

Safety standards change with time, not just in cricket but in general. No matter how good you are technically it only takes one ball at 95 mph to knock you over, people have died from head injuries in cricket. It's no joke. Only a fool would face someone like MJ without a helmet. Most tailenders don't have good technique to play a good bouncer. This guy could have easily died on the spot

 

[Adelaide Hawk]

Only a fool would face someone like MJ without a helmet.

Take it a bit further ...... "Only a fool would face someone like MJ without a helmet ..... and take his eye off the ball because he's wearing one".

BTW .... are you calling Viv Richards a fool? He continued to face up to the world's best quicks in a cap only, long after the helmet was introduced. Why? He had the proper technique for facing quick bowling.

 

[Cleavy]

Safety standards change with time, not just in cricket but in general. No matter how good you are technically it only takes one ball at 95 mph to knock you over, people have died from head injuries in cricket. It's no joke. Only a fool would face someone like MJ without a helmet. Most tailenders don't have good technique to play a good bouncer. This guy could have easily died on the spot

I'll always remember Sultan Zarwani for this moment

 

[BarneyBent]

1. Make it the 3rd Umpire's job, watching a live feed. He tells the on-field umpire if it's a no-ball, who signals. Problem solved.

2. Agree. Should be painted, and if it touches the line it's 4.

3. When you're playing at the very highest level, being paid millions, and a moment's lapse could end an innings prematurely, I can understand being concerned about any extra distractions. Not a big deal for me.

 

[The Passenger]

As far as I know the line has always belonged to the umpire.

prior to 1995ish i couldn't tell you for sure, but since then i'm almost certain that you need a part of your foot behind the line, not just touching the line.

it certainly was when i started playing grade cricket circa 2000.

prior to that there may have been a period after the back foot rule when any part of the foot touched the line meant it wasn't a no ball, but i don't remember it being like that.

as for the OP - i agree with Belnakor that the third umpire should check every no ball.

but the OP makes a valid point - at the moment it isn't the third umpires responsibility and until it is then the umpires should be doing better than missing a lot of no balls and only checking if it's a wicket.

i also think we should go to the back foot rule. yes there were draggers and they were getting a long way past the front line, but is the art of dragging not a great skill in itself?

the biggest problem world cricket has a spectacle is over rated. by absolute miles imo.

Now - leg byes. AAAAAARGHHHHHH!

get rid of them?? if so i agree. shouldn't get a run when you miss the ball. if the you miss it and the keeper misses it then fair enough.

 

[evdo1706]

BTW .... are you calling Viv Richards a fool? He continued to face up to the world's best quicks in a cap only, long after the helmet was introduced. Why? He had the proper technique for facing quick bowling.

Yes, it is a foolish thing to do. He himself admits that it was crazy although he is proud of it. And it's not like he wasn't hit by a bouncer ever, he was. He was just lucky that it wasn't fatal.

 

[Doodlesweaver]

You forgot one pioneered by Steve Bucknor for appeals........

Bowler (particularly blond legspinners): Howzat?????
Umpire: Not out.
Bowler: Why not?
Umpire: Well it was just missing leg.
Bowler: You sure, it was about to do a giant parabola, it's my new mystery ball.
Umpire: You've convinced me, it's out.
Batsman: You're nodding at me, what the hell does that mean?
Umpire: It means you're out.
Batsman: So why didn't you raise your finger?
Umpire: Yep glad you understand. He's a great bowler isn't he?

Of course, if umpires had testicles or a backbone, you could stop it at step three with the umpire saying "Because I said so, now shut up and bowl".

Then once Warne retired he went the other way and refused to ever give an lb on the last day of a test