Umpiring Biffs and Arguements

Top Contributors
joshie91

joshie91

Member
Umpiring Biffs and Arguements

Last season I was umpiring a match between two clubs in my local district. At the time, I was officiating from Square Leg and one of their fast bowlers bowled a waist high full tosser that clipped the top of leg stump.

Our competition states that you can bowl 2 in an innings before you are removed, unless the first offence was severe or hit the batsman. Everyone was cheering for the wicket until they noticed my arm out signalling no-ball.


They all stopped and the other umpire came over to me and asked why I called a no-ball. I explained that the ball hit the top of leg stump on the full and was above waist height (the batsman wasn't a tall bloke either). I formally warned the bowler that he had his first warning. Next ball was the same again, except higher and a little more well directed towards the batsman. It hit the batsman so I immediately called no-ball and pulled him from the attack. Their captain began to start yelling at me (he thought he could cos I was younger than him...d*******) because he thought that I was being unfair. I told him that any ball that hits the batsman above the knee-rolls on the pads can be considered to be dangerous and the batsman facing had already had a close call.

The laws of cricket state that any dangerous bowling can mean that the bowler can be pulled. In your opinions, was I within my rights to pull the guy out of the attack?
 
Re: Umpiring Biffs and Arguements

Retired hurt is another way of getting a wicket:D

Yes an umpire would have grounds for exiling the bowler. This bowling is not in the spirit of the game, but if it was unintentional just keep calling no balls.

Got a bat, pads, thigh pad, arm guard, helmet and gloves. Feel free to use them!
 
Re: Umpiring Biffs and Arguements

Dirk Nannes was pulled from the attack after only 1 legal delivery and neither of his balls were dangerous to the batsman, they were too bloody wide :p

But you were well within your rights, but the getting bowled off a waist high full toss is an interesting one, we had a game last year when the ball hit very low on the off stump and the square leg after being told to called a no ball
 
Re: Umpiring Biffs and Arguements

I like the idea of this thread, and saw it on the feedback board, sorry I didn't help out when you started it though.

It is hard to make a judgement with the case you have presented. Was he bowling these on purpose?

For example I have seen Brett Lee bowl two beamers in two overs, both pretty much straight at the head. He didn't get pulled out of the attack because he was very apologetic and if he meant harm, then the apologies and the little boy face would take it back from the batsman because he would think he is either an idiot or a softy for running away from it.

If this guy was intentionally bowling the ball at the top of leg, then I would have not only pulled him from the attack, but reprimanded the captain for arguing.
 
Re: Umpiring Biffs and Arguements

Going off topic, but given the times Lee was bowling those beamers it was very hard to believe he bowled either by accident
 
Re: Umpiring Biffs and Arguements

But knowing his track record with not getting into arguments and batsman forgiving him straight away, I think umpires are a little more forgiving. He genuinely looked embarressed from my eyes, and as cricket is played through spirit, a lot of the time you have to believe the bowler if he says he is sorry.

Really I believe that batsman should shake the hands of the bowler after they get them out, but I'm a bit old fashioned so I don't see that coming back. I think if a beamer is bowled the bowler should be straight down the other end in apology.

Anything above waist height directed at the batsman is the same, ribs can easily be broken, especially since a lot of club cricketers don't wear rib protection.
 
Re: Umpiring Biffs and Arguements

What's the rule with regards the situation that Brad Haddin found himself in at Lords on the 2nd day in the test match. He hit the ball off of Flintoff and the ball came down and ended up trapped in the top of his leg pads, so technically it's still not hit the ground and if one of the England players then retrieved it - it might be deemed a catch. In fact as the players approached him he ran off aware that he couldn't touch it with his hand otherwise he may have been given out - handled the ball. I'm assuming it was deemed dead ball, but what's the actual rule - does anyone know?
 
Re: Umpiring Biffs and Arguements

What's the rule with regards the situation that Brad Haddin found himself in at Lords on the 2nd day in the test match. He hit the ball off of Flintoff and the ball came down and ended up trapped in the top of his leg pads, so technically it's still not hit the ground and if one of the England players then retrieved it - it might be deemed a catch. In fact as the players approached him he ran off aware that he couldn't touch it with his hand otherwise he may have been given out - handled the ball. I'm assuming it was deemed dead ball, but what's the actual rule - does anyone know?

The ball is actually dead under the laws in these circumstances. Law 23 covers dead ball and a part of it relates to the ball being trapped between the bat and the batsman or any part of his clothing or equipment, or caught in the batsman's or umpires' clothing. There is no way a batsman can be given out from a fielder getting the ball and claiming a catch, nor can he be out handled ball if he picks up the ball himself.
 
Re: Umpiring Biffs and Arguements

Reggie Duff;374491 said:
What's the rule with regards the situation that Brad Haddin found himself in at Lords on the 2nd day in the test match. He hit the ball off of Flintoff and the ball came down and ended up trapped in the top of his leg pads, so technically it's still not hit the ground and if one of the England players then retrieved it - it might be deemed a catch. In fact as the players approached him he ran off aware that he couldn't touch it with his hand otherwise he may have been given out - handled the ball. I'm assuming it was deemed dead ball, but what's the actual rule - does anyone know?

The ball is actually dead under the laws in these circumstances. Law 23 covers dead ball and a part of it relates to the ball being trapped between the bat and the batsman or any part of his clothing or equipment, or caught in the batsman's or umpires' clothing. There is no way a batsman can be given out from a fielder getting the ball and claiming a catch, nor can he be out handled ball if he picks up the ball himself.
Click to expand...

Nice one cheers for that Reg.
 
Re: Umpiring Biffs and Arguements

I think the fact that in your first sentence you stated that they were in fact local cricketers I think you may have been a bit harsh on the bowler.

... Regardless of what it says in the rule book, I believe rules should be subject to the situation. The bowler wasn't bowling fast enough to seriously injure the batsmen was he?
 
Re: Umpiring Biffs and Arguements

It really depends on the situation though. If he was intentionally bowling there then I would have pulled him easily.

Anything not in the spirit of the game should be noticed by the umpire and a warning given. It's the only way to keep that rule alive in club cricket, and as a result higher up.
 
Re: Umpiring Biffs and Arguements

True, but if it came down to the bowler just not being good enough to control the ball, then it would be pretty rough to pull him from the attack...
 
Re: Umpiring Biffs and Arguements

Yeah, if it's due to an accident than that's fine. As long as he goes straight to the batsman and apologises, and the batsman forgives him, which he should.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top