These days Umpires hardly check for No Balls, and most bowlers get away with murder. This despite, in most of the matches, Umpires have DRS (excepting those in which India play), and don't have to worry too much about LBW. But what galls me is the Umpire, who has failed to call a no ball, asking for a review whether the bowler has overstepped, AFTER a batsman has got out. This is ridiculous to say the least. The bowler has just delivered a legitimate ball (if the umpire doesn't call a no ball, then it is supposed to be legitimate), gets a wicket, Umpire GIVES HIM OUT, celebrates and then told ' hey hang on, let me check with the third umpire to see if you have overstepped?". The batsman is on his way back, asked to wait till the check is over, and then either recalled or sent on his way. The least the Umpire can do when an appeal is made, is to 'NOT MAKE A DECISION' till they check for the No ball. Even that is a compromise. Either give the power to the third umpire to call no balls after each delivery, or develop a technology like 'cyclops' where No ball is called automatically when a bowler oversteps.
On No balls, is it not easier to change the law as it exists today, where in 'some part of the feet has to be behind the bowling crease at the time of landing'? This is complicating issues. See how easy it is in Athletics Long Jump competitions. If you touch the line, your jump is a 'Fault'. ICC can have sensors on the bowling crease, and the moment the feet touches the sensor 'No ball beep' comes up. This way one doesn't have to leave to the subjectivity of the Umpires at all.
Another absurdity is Umpires referring close-in catches to the third umpire. It is known to all and sundry that Cameras are totally unreliable when it comes to catches held close to the ground. In 100% of the cases, the ball is shown as having bounced before it enters the fielders hands, and the batsman escapes. The Cameras do have parallax error and they are not designed to give a clear cut evidence of ball bouncing or not before being caught. Knowing this, why are the catches being referred time and again? A good leg umpire, if he is observant, can easily identify if the catch is clean or not 95% of the time! The umpires are shirking their duties these days.
These days Umpires hardly check for No Balls, and most bowlers get away with murder. This despite, in most of the matches, Umpires have DRS (excepting those in which India play), and don't have to worry too much about LBW. But what galls me is the Umpire, who has failed to call a no ball, asking for a review whether the bowler has overstepped, AFTER a batsman has got out. This is ridiculous to say the least. The bowler has just delivered a legitimate ball (if the umpire doesn't call a no ball, then it is supposed to be legitimate), gets a wicket, Umpire GIVES HIM OUT, celebrates and then told ' hey hang on, let me check with the third umpire to see if you have overstepped?". The batsman is on his way back, asked to wait till the check is over, and then either recalled or sent on his way. The least the Umpire can do when an appeal is made, is to 'NOT MAKE A DECISION' till they check for the No ball. Even that is a compromise. Either give the power to the third umpire to call no balls after each delivery, or develop a technology like 'cyclops' where No ball is called automatically when a bowler oversteps.
On No balls, is it not easier to change the law as it exists today, where in 'some part of the feet has to be behind the bowling crease at the time of landing'? This is complicating issues. See how easy it is in Athletics Long Jump competitions. If you touch the line, your jump is a 'Fault'. ICC can have sensors on the bowling crease, and the moment the feet touches the sensor 'No ball beep' comes up. This way one doesn't have to leave to the subjectivity of the Umpires at all.
Another absurdity is Umpires referring close-in catches to the third umpire. It is known to all and sundry that Cameras are totally unreliable when it comes to catches held close to the ground. In 100% of the cases, the ball is shown as having bounced before it enters the fielders hands, and the batsman escapes. The Cameras do have parallax error and they are not designed to give a clear cut evidence of ball bouncing or not before being caught. Knowing this, why are the catches being referred time and again? A good leg umpire, if he is observant, can easily identify if the catch is clean or not 95% of the time! The umpires are shirking their duties these days.
