Thoughts on Umpiring

As some of you are aware, I was the victim of what can only be considered a somewhat dubious LBW earlier this season during a “Friendly” against Abbotsbury. The whys and wherefores will not be discussed here, but I thought I would take a look at umpiring in general and ask the question – "Are we getting a good service from League umpires, and if we rely on providing our own is it any surprise dodgy decisions can occur?"

Cricket is one of the most technical of the team games played, with multiple ways of being dismissed and an assumption that umpires can at least count to six. In addition, added interruptions caused by wides and no-balls mean that an umpire has (or should have) many things to consider whilst on the pitch. The matter is further confused as the umpire in our standard of cricket only ever gets one look at an incident. From this he/she is expected to make an honest and unbiased decision. It is this last sentence that causes many teams long hours of discussions after the game.

Most teams will tolerate poor umpiring and perceived dodgy decisions providing the umpire is consistent in his/her interpretation and treats both sides equally. A good example of this is Richard Stewkesbury and his interpretation of the wide law outside leg stump. Whilst we often moan about Richard, he is always consistent and it is to his credit that he continues to umpire despite some of the banal comments he is forced to endure (that last LBW appeal was bloody close though mate). Lesser persons could use this treatment as an excuse to ‘trigger’ the said culprits at the first opportunity, but to my knowledge Richard has never done this and if anything getting an LBW from Richard is like getting Graham Elenor to buy a round – bloody nigh impossible.

There are two areas that need to be discussed – matches where teams appoint their own umpire and those where umpires are appointed by the Dorset League.

In matches where teams provide their own umpire there is a danger that levels of consistency will be abused. Most teams use team players to rotate umpire duties, each member having different perceptions of the interpretation of the Laws. In addition senior players tend to offload duties to the younger players with the instruction "keep your bloody finger down!" This can then lead to problems and the occasional poor decision for the batting team. Is it any wonder considering our actions? We must try to use responsible persons for umpiring duties and keep the number of rotations down to a minimum. (I must point out one notable exception this year when Shillingstone provided 2 umpires for the whole match, both qualified and both having a good sense of humour and a strong knowledge of the Laws. To my knowledge no-one had any complaints about any major decisions and both gentlemen were consistent with their decisions throughout. Many thanks guys!).

On the other hand I was fortunate to witness some of the most inept umpiring at the recent Weymouth II v PRT the other week. In this instance the umpires had been chosen to stand by the Dorset Umpire’s Panel. It seems pretty obvious to me that the two umpires would get together, decide on the interpretation of ‘wide’ for the match and inform the captains of their decision. However, whilst one umpire gave everything down the leg side as wide (correct as far as the League Ruling is concerned) the other let so many go by that the crowd (all 18) started shouting to remind him of his obligation. Further incidents occurred around Simon Browne, twice being caught behind, twice not walking (there is no law that makes it compulsory to walk), and twice being given not out by the same umpire. It seems to me that whilst many can pass an exam on the Laws of the game the panel does not check eyesight, common sense, or sense of humour.

If clubs are not satisfied with the level of umpiring and in general it is pretty bad then it is up to the clubs to contact the league in writing and demand an improvement. However it must be a two-edged sword. The club must consider sending club members on the umpiring course. It is no mistake that first class umpires tend to originate from first class cricketers. They have a comprehensive knowledge and understanding of the game and are used to the gamesmanship often displayed. They also tend to command respect from their peers. Dorset cricket should be umpired by Dorset cricketers, not the local old boys who think it might be a good idea to have a Saturday or Sunday out watching a bit of cricket and getting a free tea. Yes that is perhaps a little flippant, but it is no surprise that the best umpires in league cricket at the moment are those who used to play a few years ago, for example Jim Crump.

I shall end this now, before I get the urge to get really voracious about effort on the field combined with frustration at unused talent going to waste.