Should the square leg umpire move in line with the bowlers crease to determine no-balls?

greatwhiteshark

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Oct 3, 2007
Posts
9,484
Likes
8,450
Location
Perth
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
West Perth
#26
The most stupid rule change in cricket history was changing from the back foot no ball rule to the front foot no ball rule.

Return things to the back foot no ball rule and problem solved.

But realistically it is not difficult for an umpire to look at no balls, if he does not call it then that should be that. If it was a no ball then the umpire himself is dropped for the next test and faces a penalty for not doing his job correctly.

It is not hard to see if a foot crosses a line.

Back foot no ball rule should be returned.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

year of the roo

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
May 12, 2003
Posts
24,675
Likes
6,649
AFL Club
North Melbourne
#27
I reckon umpires should just get closer to the stumps. Perhaps not right behind them, but maybe 1metre. They are standing 5-6metres back for some reason, no wonder they can't see it properly.
 

BluesMan

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Mar 3, 2008
Posts
17,064
Likes
7,074
Location
Perth
AFL Club
Carlton
Other Teams
Chelsea, B.Celtics
#29
The square leg umpire refers the stumpings/runouts when they cant tell if the batsmans foot/bat is on the line, over it, or just before it. If he moves to midwicket to tell if its a no ball he wont be 100% sure, whether is over or close and will refer no-balls like he would refer a stumping.

Silly idea, keep it the way it is/
 

sherb

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Sep 28, 2003
Posts
26,854
Likes
19,850
Location
Western Sydney
AFL Club
Carlton
Other Teams
Swans
#30

dumb

i shit blue
Joined
Jul 12, 2008
Posts
9,909
Likes
3,171
Location
Vic
AFL Club
Carlton
#31
from cricinfo

Ryan Harris' two wickets were both referred to the third umpire for checks on a possible no-ball, and both showed that his foot was comfortably behind the line. After the first, Gautam Gambhir, Clarke noted how comfortably Harris' foot had been behind the line and engaged in animated conversation with the umpires. Their response, later relayed to the public sphere, was that Harris' bowling action had his back foot blocking the umpire's view of his front, thus encouraging officiators to check. Harris has only bowled four no-balls in his Test career.
 

CAS79

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Posts
16,132
Likes
2,395
Location
around about
AFL Club
Sydney
#32
The most stupid rule change in cricket history was changing from the back foot no ball rule to the front foot no ball rule.

Return things to the back foot no ball rule and problem solved.

But realistically it is not difficult for an umpire to look at no balls, if he does not call it then that should be that. If it was a no ball then the umpire himself is dropped for the next test and faces a penalty for not doing his job correctly.

It is not hard to see if a foot crosses a line.

Back foot no ball rule should be returned.
Everyone it is official.

Richie Benaud posts on bigfooty :eek:
 
Top Bottom