Forums
Welcome to Live View – Take the tour to learn more
Start Tour
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
Lies, DamnLies, and Statistics
20 Dec 09 03:01
Joined:
Date Joined: 13 Jan 05
| Topic/replies: 7,747 | Blogger: Lies, DamnLies, and Statistics's blog
In response to anyone who has called billy bowden a ricky ponting lapdog, or thought the same, or even considered that an international cricket umpire may not be entirely impartial...yes, even those home umpires from pre-ICC panel days...

I have quit playing cricket this season, and taken up umpiring in the local competition (not the one i used to play in)...as I am a fair bit younger and obviously newer than other umpires, i have certainly been tested out by some teams and players...here's a couple of stories

1) 2 games ago, the home team were in the field in the first week. To cut a long story short, the keeper (a relentless sledger and generally unpleasant person) put in about 5 massive appeals at my end - 4 for caught behind and 1 for lbw. the lbw was extremely close, but the ball was possibly just swinging down leg side. The first caught behind appeal was obviously straight off the pad, and subconsciously probably undermined all their team's subsequent appeals for caught behind, none of which i could be sure were hit. The end result of the day was 5 very large appeals from an extremely unpleasant keeper all turned down.

Next week, the keeper is yet to score and facing a medium-pacer. He is hit on the pad. I can honestly say the only thoughts that crossed my mind between the appeal and raising my finger were: did it hit him in line? how about height? no possibility of missing leg? The first time the batsman's unpleasantness entered my mind was when he gave me a gobfull as he walked off.

2) last game, a fat hopeless opening bowler with a rather large opinion of himself is bowling late on the first day - he oversteps, i call no-ball loudly and clearly, the batsman is caught. No-one on the ground is in any doubt it's a no-ball, but fat hopeless bowler stands at the crease and demands that i show him where he landed. I say "you were over, i called no-ball, get on with the game"...after play, a senior player from the other team goes to fat hopeless bowler and calls him a f**kwit, which i would have to agree with

next week, first ball he faced at my end, fat hopeless bowler is hit on the pad. The only thoughts that go through my mind between the appeal and making the decision are cricket-related. This time i decide it's a bit high, not out is the decision. I am only reminded that's it's the f**kwit on strike when a fielder calls out that i owed fat hopeless bowler one from last week...

My (lengthy) point is this: The ONLY thing that goes through an umpire's mind as he makes a decision is the decision itself. I have umpired 7 games of park cricket....anyone who even thinks that an umpire gets to test level by being anything less than completely impartial, or for some reason decides to become buddies with one team more than another when they reach test level, is so far from the mark that they really should be locked up for their own safety
Pause Switch to Standard View Thoughts on Umpiring...
Show More
Loading...
Report good value losers December 20, 2009 3:35 AM GMT
Lies, DamnLies, and Statistics 20 Dec 04:01
I have umpired 7 games of park cricket


with credentials like that who can argue with you?
Report Craig The Speculator December 20, 2009 3:41 AM GMT
in interesting piece lies

i umpire my sons games and with there being the obvious conflict of interest much more than what you say comes into my mind but usually after the decision is made

i often question myself, did i give that not out cause he was our best batsman or similar - i do try to be impartial though and think i'm umpiring the same for both sides but being non neutral does add an additional factor to consider
Report The Big O Roy Orbison December 20, 2009 6:20 AM GMT
cant believe i wasted a couple o minutes reading that shi t :^0
some young chap whos umpired ahandful of park games is now the authority on test match umpiring.
do take note poppapump ole son
Report Deadly Earnest December 20, 2009 7:06 AM GMT
I'll support Lies to this extent here - the principles of impartiality in umpiring ought to be the same at any level.

Lies has clearly put a good level of thought into the issue and I'd listen to someone who has done that over someone who hadn't any day, regardless of the level they have umpired or what position or experience they hold.
Report The Big O Roy Orbison December 20, 2009 7:18 AM GMT
ive put a good level of thought in to it aswell young deadly ole son - someone who's umpired 7 club games knows nothing
Report Deadly Earnest December 20, 2009 7:29 AM GMT
So by umpiring 7 club games of cricket you disqualify yourself from having anything useful to say about umpiring impartiality.

Hogwash.

We can expect a professional umpire will likely know a lot more than a park cricket umpire about umpiring in general, but I can't see any reason why a lower level umpire would not be in as good a position to comment on the subject of impartiality.

Umpiring impartiality is what this thread is about.
Report bigpoppapump December 20, 2009 7:37 AM GMT
your point is a simple contention. it needs no preamble.

I've played loads of amateur cricket - doesnt mean I can read any other player's mind
that you're not quick witted enough to be biased when making a decision [or don't think you are] doesn't mean you can read minds. which seems to be the new talent you've acquired with your new hobby.

enjoy your umpiring, but it's a bit bizarre for you to think it now means you know that no umpire at Test level could be partial to a side.
Report The Big O Roy Orbison December 20, 2009 7:40 AM GMT
i think being pressured by someone with 11000 test runs or someone with 700 wkts is slightly different to a "fat useless opening bowler."
to say otherwise is hogwash ole son ;)
you seem like a nice fella young deadly, a bit boring but not a bad chap. so as its the festive season the big o will give u a tip today if he has a bet so fill your boots.
Report bigpoppapump December 20, 2009 7:44 AM GMT
of course, my other response was:

:^0 WTF?
Report Lix December 20, 2009 8:03 AM GMT
Who is this Big O character.....? ?:|

He reminds me of someone although I thought they were at the game in SA.... ;)
Report GrimReaper December 20, 2009 8:21 AM GMT
Always interested to read cricket stories, so thanks for sharing LDLS. However, your contention appears to be "I am impartial, therefore everybody else is". I don't buy that, sorry.

Do you think Miandad was governed by the same laws as everyone else whilst playing in Pakistan?
Report bigpoppapump December 20, 2009 8:35 AM GMT
lol Grim. Shakhoor Rana sprang to mind for me, but I couldn't be ar5ed. Lies has made his mind up - there's no such thing as a biased umpire, so that's up to him...
Report Deadly Earnest December 20, 2009 8:53 AM GMT
That doesn't seems his main point at all. Lies seems to be saying he doesn't believe you would make it to umpiring on the elite panel if you were observed to be biased in any way.

I agree that his thought processes as an umpire do not act as proof of what other umpires think, but they could be some sort of guide to what an umpire acting properly would be thinking.

If you think Billy is biased towards Australia, then you wouldn't be using today's decision as evidence for that would you? Snicko apparently showed a small sound as the ball passed the bat.

I do recall some conversations with Australian players though where they said that Billy seemed especially keen to chat to them during play and they felt it was wise to foster the relationship. ;)
Report bigpoppapump December 20, 2009 8:55 AM GMT
The ONLY thing that goes through an umpire's mind as he makes a decision is the decision itself
Report GrimReaper December 20, 2009 9:01 AM GMT
Haven't seen the decision Deadly so can't comment.

In reference to the other point, let us say - purely for the purposes of illustration of course - that I despise Australian cricketers. I stand in the English leagues, then in the first class game, and people think I'm a great umpire, resulting in my elevation to the test panel.

At no stage I have ever really been tested about my prejudice...but now I get the chance to demonstrate it. I know have the glorious opportunity, when Ponting strides out to the crease, to whisper to Dale Steyn, Ishant Sharma, Mohammed Asif or whoever ..."you hit the pads, son, and I'll do the rest.." ]:)

(Purely for the purposes of illustration) ;)
Report GrimReaper December 20, 2009 9:02 AM GMT
*now...

(save you the effort, Poppa) ;)
Report fundamentalist December 20, 2009 9:04 AM GMT
dont forget to get a few quid on first Grim ;)
Report bigpoppapump December 20, 2009 9:05 AM GMT
the decision [for grim]:

play and miss outside off.
aus spontaneous celebration/appeal [as an honest side we give the appeal extra marks for spontenaity]
Billy gives it.
windies refer.
hotspot shows no hotspot
off field says inconclusive - back to the impartial onfield antipodean.
Billy says Test over well played Ricky and the lads :)

forum-aussies dream up "feathered seam" to make themselves feel better about their side struggling past the Windies powerhouse.
Report GrimReaper December 20, 2009 9:10 AM GMT
It's the "hotspot shows no hotspot" bit that I'm struggling with...:_|

What would one expect it to say, if there has been no edge.... ?? Was snicko employed? What did it say?
Report bigpoppapump December 20, 2009 9:11 AM GMT
how do you mean struggling?

the ball goes past the outside edge and hotspot shows no hotspot.
Report bigpoppapump December 20, 2009 9:12 AM GMT
that whiteness thing created by contact. doesnt happen. stays all dark [as in: no contact]
Report GrimReaper December 20, 2009 9:16 AM GMT
Struggling to see why decision upheld, obviously.

What did snicko say?
Report Deadly Earnest December 20, 2009 9:20 AM GMT
Grim I don't think we saw it here, but Joel on another thread reported snicko was shown later and showed a small disturbance as the ball past the bat, about half what you would normally expect for an edge.

There were a good few near misses earlier with no appeal so it would seem more than coincidental the Aussies concerted an appeal at the time snicko showed a faint noise.

Don't get me wrong, I do think Billy has a bit of a soft spot for the Aussies for some reason, and I didn't want it to be out, I had about 6 months wages green WI, and I wouldn't be beyond calling the Aussies a pack of **ing **s over that amount.

Bigpop's assertions regarding Billy hading this to the Aussies make a nice story but hardly backed up by the facts here.
Report bigpoppapump December 20, 2009 9:20 AM GMT
decision upheld because...because...

dunno. technology showed he didnt hit it. that's all i know.

I've seen the suggestion that the sponenaity of the appeal is to be factored in in some way, but not sure I'm entirely comfortable with the Aussies deciding their own decisions. Their record in this match alone, is somewhat patchy in being convinced that something's out when frankly, it isn't.
Report GrimReaper December 20, 2009 9:22 AM GMT
I don't know who Joel is....is he an Aussie perchance?

(genuine question)
Report bigpoppapump December 20, 2009 9:23 AM GMT
Billy favours aus.
Billy favoured aus here.

the decision was crucial. I'm not exactly making some huge leap of logic to say Billy was the main man for Aus at the end.

FWIW the margin is a bit more comfortable than it looks on paper imo. They'd have won without this decision, but the fact is it wasn't out, and it was given by bowden.
Report bigpoppapump December 20, 2009 9:23 AM GMT
Bigpop's assertions regarding Billy hading this to the Aussies make a nice story but hardly backed up by the facts here.

bizarre.
Report Deadly Earnest December 20, 2009 9:32 AM GMT
Yes grim i think Joel is an Aussie but he is a credible poster from what I know of him.

Bigpop, do you dismiss the possibility a feather edge may not show up on hotspot? And do you dismiss the report on snicko apparently showing a faint noise?

I don't think a spontaneous appeal is to be taken as evidence of a batsman being out at all and have never suggested as much. Quite the reverse, I was suggesting the faint noise would explain the spontaneous appeal.

I don't think there is enough evidence to say Billy acted improperly and I can't really see what else the 3rd ump could do if Billy said he heard a slight noise as I am sure he did. the 3rd ump may actually have had snicko made available to him for all we know.
Report Joel December 20, 2009 9:57 AM GMT
Yes I am, and just before 9 finished their coverage they showed the snicko which as mentioned showed a line, not as big as a geniune nick but enough to suggest there was a noise as the ball went past the bat.
Report good value losers December 20, 2009 10:54 AM GMT
i read the 1st post after the nfl finished and was gobsmacked. still am. how someone who has ump'ed a few**y little games can set himself up as a fcking expert and start lecturing people on here is quite beyond me.
Report Deadly Earnest December 20, 2009 11:11 AM GMT
If giving your view on something and showing how you came to that view is lecturing GVL, then we may as well all keep our views to ourselves.

If you disagree with his assertion that an umpire wouldn't get to international level if he was biased then fair enough. Criticising someone for simply stating their view is attacking the man and not the ball imo, and poor form.

I mean, what minimum qualification do you need to comment on anything? None is the answer imo.

I think there is an obvious error in the post, but I'm happy to see people writing what they think. Questioning a person's right to give his view reeks of English class system thinking.
Report Super Vixen December 20, 2009 11:12 AM GMT
Whether any umpire is or is not impartial - and I reckon there have been plenty of iffy ones over the years - the biggest problem at the moment is the ridiculous pressure certain players are putting them under.

Ridiculous appeals, the classic double appeal, the standing with the hands on the hips shaking their heads, the general poor standard of behaviour. Think Ponting, Sreesanth, Harby, Panesar (remember him?), and many , many others.

The ICC needs to order match refs to stop with the pathetic "2 games ban suspended to 2035" and tell them to dish out some immediate 3 game bans - if that doesn't stop them, nothing will.
Report spassky December 20, 2009 11:13 AM GMT
GVL, has this been annoying you for over seven hours, so you had to come back and make the same point ? :D

I think it was an interesting thread, and he gave well-reasoned examples. I agree that you can't extrapolate from what he is feeling, to the pressures felt by International umpires, but I don't agree with dismissing him because he has "only" stood in seven matches.
Report bigpoppapump December 20, 2009 11:14 AM GMT
he's questioned the guy's bizarre line of reasoning that he can mind read international umpires because he's umpired a game himself.

defending that bizarre logic reeks of one-eyed-aussie we'll argue anything, to me.
Report good value losers December 20, 2009 11:16 AM GMT
deadly earnest - by all means give your views, but it's the implication in the post that because he's umpired a few**y little games and has a couple dull stories to tell that his view is somehow more noteworthy.

spassky - i wasn't in fit state to give vent to my full spleen last night lol
Report Green Beard December 20, 2009 11:17 AM GMT
to be honest, most of us have sat in our arm chairs and watched a bit of cricket and consider ourselves experts, i certainly do

also GVL, youve made posts on this thread that dont mention me at all, are you ok?
Report good value losers December 20, 2009 11:20 AM GMT
shouldthat be full vent to my spleen? fck who cares perm any combination of vent, spleen and full
Report bigpoppapump December 20, 2009 11:20 AM GMT
Some eccentrics are born. Others thrust eccentricity upon themselves. Step forward, Brent "Billy" Bowden, the New Zealand umpiring sensation who shot to fame with a zany array of embellished signals and a preposterous eye for showmanship. Bowden turned to umpiring after the onset of arthritis in his early-twenties, and earned a reputation for giving batsmen out with a curiously**finger. Suitably encouraged, he threw out the rule-book which states that the best cricket officials are the ones that go unnoticed, and added a whole host of whacky twists to his daily routine. The most celebrated of these is his hop-on-one-leg-and-reach-for-Jesus signal for six, and he seems pre-programmed to pose throughout a match, even when ducking for his life as a pull-shot rockets through square-leg. For all the embellishments, his decision-making skills are almost without equal among the ICC's elite panel, although in 2007 he was suspended from standing at that year's inaugural Twenty20 World Championships, following his role in the farcical conclusion of the World Cup final in Barbados.

but my point is Bowden favour australia.

see what I did there ;)
Report Lies, DamnLies, and Statistics December 20, 2009 11:26 AM GMT
lol, i post on poppa's thread, he tells me i am a stalker and need to start my own thread

i start own thread and post a genuine opinion...and because i am not simon taufel i get ridiculed

lovely forum we have here - think i'll stick around a while
Report bigpoppapump December 20, 2009 11:27 AM GMT
you've been ridiculed because of what you've posted.
Report GrimReaper December 20, 2009 11:27 AM GMT
Not everyone's having a go, Lies - although as stated above I don't agree with you. Don't stamp off in a hissy fit, there's a good chap :)
Report Lies, DamnLies, and Statistics December 20, 2009 11:27 AM GMT
lovely forum we have here - think i'll stick around a while
Report Lies, DamnLies, and Statistics December 20, 2009 11:28 AM GMT
p.s. i'm not stomping anywhere

p.p.s. you call that a hissy fit?? ;)
Report bigpoppapump December 20, 2009 11:29 AM GMT
just to be clear.

i find your opening post laughable. but it's not personal. you may in the past have posted things I agreed with, and you may do so again in future. okay? :)
Report GrimReaper December 20, 2009 11:29 AM GMT
I guess I don't play the role of peacekeeper that well... :_|
Report bigpoppapump December 20, 2009 11:30 AM GMT
bohemond; I find objectionable on a personal level. totally different.
Report GrimReaper December 20, 2009 11:31 AM GMT
Appalling use of the semi colon there, if I may be so bold, Mr Pump.... ;)
Report Lies, DamnLies, and Statistics December 20, 2009 11:32 AM GMT
cheers poppa - just don't call me a stalker again - i don't like it much as it is far too close to the bone...
Report bigpoppapump December 20, 2009 11:32 AM GMT
yeah sorry: comma, I asume?
Report bigpoppapump December 20, 2009 11:33 AM GMT
well lies, you have a dedicated a whole thread to me in your bid not to be considered a stalker. which is a strange way of going about it...
Report GrimReaper December 20, 2009 11:33 AM GMT
In pure grammatical terms, I think it would have better to state "I find Bohemond objectionable..."
Report Lies, DamnLies, and Statistics December 20, 2009 11:34 AM GMT
i know :(
Report Lies, DamnLies, and Statistics December 20, 2009 11:35 AM GMT
defended shane watson is also a strange way to promote the notion that not all aussies are like him....

it's been a bad weekend
Report Lies, DamnLies, and Statistics December 20, 2009 11:35 AM GMT
*defending
Report Deadly Earnest December 20, 2009 11:40 AM GMT
good value losers 20 Dec 12:16


deadly earnest - by all means give your views, but it's the implication in the post that because he's umpired a few**y little games and has a couple dull stories to tell that his view is somehow more noteworthy



I don't want to sound silly over semantices here GVL and I doubt you want to split hairs over meanings of words either. I feel the need to clarify one thing here though. I just say with respect, that there is no such implication in my post.

The point I made was stated clearly and not implied. He had obviously put some thought into the issue and that is what i was supporting, as opposed to attributing authority to only those with impressive sounding credentials. I think if you re-read my post you might not see the same implication now.

No big deal of course.
Report bigpoppapump December 20, 2009 11:41 AM GMT
:^0
Report oitoitoi December 20, 2009 2:03 PM GMT
i think regarding bowden it's just subconscious, on those 50/50 decisions he always seems to side with the aussies.
Report Lies, DamnLies, and Statistics December 20, 2009 10:15 PM GMT
The Big O Roy Orbison 20 Dec 19:40
i think being pressured by someone with 11000 test runs or someone with 700 wkts is slightly different to a "fat useless opening bowler."
to say otherwise is hogwash ole son ;)

-----------------------------------

at the risk of reviving this thread, that is EXACTLY my point. I was trying to establish at which point in an umpire's career the level of intimidation that affects decisions kicks in - quite clearly it isn't there at park cricket level - so when does it start? first class level? test level?

if it is there at test level, does it only apply when someone like warne is bowling or tendulkar is batting, or does it apply to debutants and journeymen players as well?

test umpires progress through the system just like players. they don't jump straight from a park match to a test match, so surely people are saying this intimidation kicks in as they rise one level - i am asking, which level is that?

on bowden specifically, he has umpired more tests than any australian player bar ponting, and is arguably as recognisable a face in the game as any australian player. so who was he intimidated by when he gave that caught behind? ponting at slip? haddin? dougie bollinger?

you can argue that bowden's profile is contrary to what an umpire should be, but how can you argue he is intimidated by a bowler in his 4th match, and a team almost entirely less experienced at test level than he is?

if you are arguing that bowden is more interested in being mates with the aussies than he is in his umpiring career, you would look even more silly.

so answer me this question if you are going to reply and continue this thread where i have said all i have to say - what would bowden's decision have been if dougie bollinger was batting and the same ball occurred? are you saying he would have said 'not out' because he favours australia in 50/50 decisions? if you believe that, you would believe anything
Report oitoitoi December 20, 2009 11:49 PM GMT
It's sad to say but white men trust white men more than they do black men even if it's not intentional, i honestly believe that an appeal from ponting is giong to sound more convincing to bowden than an appeal from gayle, remember that everyone isn't as enlightened as you. It's the way of the world, and umpires certainly aren't perfect.
Report ramone December 21, 2009 4:33 PM GMT
That Bowden is a:

a. clown

b. self-publicist

c. patchy performer

I don't think anyone could really dispute.

If he does favour the convicts then it is a bias gained in recent years. He gave Kaspo out at Edgbaston05 which sealed the match and later on the Ashes. It was a call that could have gone the other way and on referal would have been over turned.
Post Your Reply
<CTRL+Enter> to submit
Please login to post a reply.

Wonder

Instance ID: 13539
www.betfair.com