Umpiring Cricket?

Question

exustrek - my boys do bowl straight and do a lot of appealing.

Answer 1

In those circumstances a warning is the best option.

I'm a little concerned with the words "unless absolutely plum". It's plumb, with a 'b' by the way.

You should only ever give people out when they are absolutely plumb, at any level of cricket.

You've got good bowlers in your league.  Our under 12s don't bowl that many straight balls in a season.

Answer 2

On the contrary, I think they need to learn right from the start, that rules are rules.If you let them get away with it as kids, they will not accept being given out when they get older.

Answer 3

This is a good one!

LBW is always a difficult judgement. For the umpires as well as for the person who is given out. There are just too many rules.

It is quite interesting to have a tournament rule to have 1 free-LBW decision going in favor of the batting side.

When we see kids as early as 16 or 17 are trying to get into National sides - it's definitely difficult to argue in favor of such linient rules.

I really think, this kind of rules should be driven by the level of cricket the kids are playing - rather than the age bar.

If the tournament is important enough - follow the ICC guidline. If it is just a fun tournament - who cares about the age - just go with the rules you agree on.

That's what the intension was it seemed to me - in this case. TO get kids interested in cricket. Under those circumstances, I would love to follow the freebee rule!

:-)

Answer 4

We had a very similar rule when I was a child; you couldn't be out lbw until you had scored 20, but you also had to retire at 30 to give everybody a bat and to stop some of the best batsmen massacring the bowling for hours on end. Not out batsmen who retired after passing 30 could come back at the end of the innings (after the number 11 had come in) and continue. It's a good rule for school and social club cricket, the best batsmen and bowlers will usually be playing for a league club under "proper" rules at the same time anyway, so it doesn't affect their improvement.

At least with the match you describe above your charges will have learnt a valuable lesson about the inconsistencies of umpiring.

Answer 5

That's a good idea giving them a warning when it's close to give them a go. I would change it around under 13's - under 15's so they get used to rough decisions when they enter the higher grades. 10 LBW's is so bad when your playing underage cricket they should be given a fair go.

Answer 6

Like you said "the kids didn't enjoy it". The game was for under 12s. Whist doing my coaching badge the No1 priority is for EVERYONE to get something out of the game, whatever there ability, If the kids are going home disappointed  why bother. I find a simple Not Out is far less controversial.

Answer 7

Kids should be given the benefit of doubt, just like the International Players also need to get this benefit.

However, kids should realize that all umpires are not the same, all days are not the same, all venues and opponents are not the same...

Batsmen need to be given the benefit of the doubt!