Ireland Umpires Association - Newsletter Aug 1994

Leinster Cricket Umpires` Association NEWSLETTER 70 - August 1994, Executive Notes

TOMMY THOMPSON MEMORIAL MATCH. On Tuesday 12th July the inaugural Tommy Thompson Memorial Match took place between an LCUA XI and Old Belvedere`s Taverners at Cabra Oval. Despite appalling weather conditions the match was played in the best of Taverners spirit. Besides numerous members of Tommy`s family, there was an excellent turnout from the club and after the match, Alec O`Riordan, President of OB, spoke warmly and movingly about Tommy. Tommy`s wife, Derry, presented her portrait of Tommy at the bowler`s end as the trophy for the match. The painting was much admired, especially for the glint in Tommy`s eye, and will be kept in the OB`s pavilion. The club entertained the players and officials to a pleasant meal. All in all, it was a most fitting tribute to a much-loved man. (Who won the match? Old Belvedere as it happens, but who cares. And that`s the way Tommy would like it.)

GROUND REPORTS. Despite an instruction from the Leinster Cricket Union, not all clubs have a properly marked boundary. Umpires should report all instances of inadequately marked boundaries on the Ground Report Form. There have also been instances of clubs pleading ignorance of the requirement for fielding circles in the Senior Cup. Umpires must insist that the regulations be complied with, Failure to do so lets down all other umpires who have to face the retort that `we didn`t have them last week against Club X`. The Grounds Committee is pleased with the number of reports coming in and has noted our concern with the lack of facilities for umpires. Keep those reports rolling in!

TEA INTERVAL. One Senior League match recently continued past the scheduled tea interval and on to 5 p.m. so that 65 overs could be completed. This is completely contrary to the agreement made at the start of the season by the LCU and discussed in detail for the benefit of umpires in the Newsletter. We must all abide by the same regulations or we will bring ourselves into disrepute. (Is is merely a coincidence that the clubs involved were the same two who insisted on using a substitute as a wicket-keeper a few years back?)

UNFAIR PLAY? A bowler rubs his hand in the dust before bowling a ball. No problem - he is obviously drying his hand in order to get a better grip. However, to gather up a handful of dust and apply it to the ball may be in breach of the law and constitute altering the condition of the ball. Umpires may need to keep a look out to make sure that the practice is not abused.

Some batsmen take a long time between deliveries and hold up play. The batsman should normally be ready to receive when the bowler is ready to start his run up. Umpires should intervene to prevent such delays. This is of particular importance in the Senior League where penalty points can be incurred for slow over-rates.

PUZZLER What should happen if the ball is deflected onto the parked fielder`s helmet off a leg-bye which you would disallow?

PUZZLER - SOME THOUGHTS Since no runs would normally be allowed, no penalty could be incurred. What could be entered in the scorebook? Not five legbyes because the leg-bye is disallowed. Call and signal `dead ball` and get on with the game.

LAW AND PRACTICE The Wicket is Down (Law 28). The first weeks of the season have thrown up three quite separate, instructive incidents relating to this law. What is your decision?

1. The bowler in attempting to take the ball knocked off one bail. He then collected the ball and with the ball in hand, removed the other bail and appealed.

2. The bowler in attempting to gather the ball knocked off both bails, collected the ball and in one continuous movement, pulled a stump out of the ground with the hand holding the ball.

3. Both bails were knocked off in an unsuccessful attempt at a run out. The batsmen ran a second and the ball was thrown in and struck the stumps with the batsman clearly out of his ground.

In the first case, the umpire correctly gave the batsman out - much to his consternation. It is not clear whether he was eventually persuaded of the umpire`s correct interpretation of Law 28.2. In the second case, the wicket was fairly broken and the batsman would have been run out if he had been out of his ground. This story illustrates not only the very good knowledge of the laws of some players, but also the speed of thought and execution. The bowler didn`t appeal because in all this flurry of activity he had time to realise that the batsmen had made good his ground. In the third case, the batsman was correctly given not out. In order to break the wicket without bails it is necessary to remove a stump completely from the ground by throwing the ball or with ball in hand. It is permissible for the fielding side to replace one or both bails in order to remove a bail. In this case, the fielding side took some convincing that the umpire`s decision was correct, which goes to show that not all players have a sound knowledge of the laws!

FIELDCRAFT. Murray Power, scorer with the Irish team at Leicester for the Nat-West match, noted that umpire Barry Leadbeater was using a new signal. Having decided that a run was to be scored as a leg-bye, he stuck out his hand, palm down, and left it there until the action was over and he was ready to signal leg-bye. This presumably serves two functions. Firstly, it helps to remind the umpire to signal the leg-bye and secondly, it gives a useful cue the scorers that the signal is coming. Will it catch on? Who knows, but remember you read it here first! This also invites the question of whether we could usefully adopt more signals: for example, the signal allegedly used by umpires in Australia for `over` (and used by all non-official umpires in our cricket); or the Australian signal for a revoked call. Any suggestions?

TELEGRAPH. In the June Newsletter, it was commented that the telegraph is not properly the responsibility of the scorers. This view has been disputed. (It`s great to have the comments!) Certainly the ACU&S does not think it is a primary responsibility. But if not the scorers, then who? In the mind of the writer was the situation where a scorebox is not in use. Then, it is argued, it is unreasonable to expect the scorers to get up and down every three minutes or so for up to seven hours. It is further suggested that since nine members of the batting side have nothing useful to do, they could easily work out some kind of shift system. If they are not prepared to put the score up for their colleagues at the wickets, it is a poor indication of their team spirit.