What's new

ICC World Cup 2023 Umpiring watch

FearlessRoar

FearlessRoar

T20I Star
Joined
Sep 11, 2023
Runs
30,521
The statistics don’t lie, The 14th over was only of 5 balls. Such Irresponsible umpiring in Mega Event of Cricket

What are your thoughts?



1696589484874.png
 
I also noticed that over was only 5 balls. I though I had missed 1 delivery but nope. Umpiring is a mess and 3rd umpire is also sleeping in his chair I guess.
 
Pakistan encountered two umpiring errors on their road to recovery, however. Firstly, the 14th over of the Pakistan innings contained just five deliveries. Over was called after Shakeel dispatched the fifth delivery of the over for four with both standing umpires Adrian Holdstock and Chris Brown content that six balls had been bowled. By the time that the fielders were in place for the start of the 15th over, there was no intervention from the TV umpire Rod Tucker to alert the standing officials of their error.

Law 17.5 deals with the umpires miscounting, and explains that any revisions are not possible after a ball is bowled. “If the umpire miscounts the number of valid balls, the over as counted by the umpire shall stand,” it states.

There was a similar error eight overs later. As Shakeel hit a Roelof van der Merwe delivery to the boundary, he and Rizwan immediately signalled to the umpires that the Netherlands had one too many fielders stationed outside the fielding circle. On this occasion, there was enough time for the umpires to rectify their mistake and no ball was called. The free hit was subsequently hit for six.
 
Hmm

Ahsan Raza had to have a few looks at this one:

"Mujeeb to Mehidy Hasan Miraz, no run, Not out! Was tossed up full on off-stump, drifted in nicely and Mehidy Hasan Miraz had already committed his front-foot, he leaned forward looking to push it into the off-side but it turned back in quite sharply but as it turned out, just hit a bit of bat before pad. Another reprieve for Mehidy Hasan Miraz. Close call in the end as the bat was right next to pad when there was a spike, Afghanistan aren't too happy with that"

Hawkeys says

KpKIJj4.png


but seems the ball was touching the bat - close one
 
MenInG said:
Hmm

Ahsan Raza had to have a few looks at this one:

"Mujeeb to Mehidy Hasan Miraz, no run, Not out! Was tossed up full on off-stump, drifted in nicely and Mehidy Hasan Miraz had already committed his front-foot, he leaned forward looking to push it into the off-side but it turned back in quite sharply but as it turned out, just hit a bit of bat before pad. Another reprieve for Mehidy Hasan Miraz. Close call in the end as the bat was right next to pad when there was a spike, Afghanistan aren't too happy with that"

Hawkeys says

KpKIJj4.png


but seems the ball was touching the bat - close one
Click to expand...
It was as close as it can get.
 
Nothing looked behind the line, foot is on the crease so in my opinion it should have given out.

1696875930393.jpeg
 
Event: 1696901589529.png
Rule: When collecting the ball for stumping the gloves needs to be behind the wicket. If the gloves are ahead or even in the line of the wickets, the stumping would be not out and the ball would be deemed as a no ball

Time of event:
1696901628662.png

Decision by Umpire: Not out, and a no ball given

Discussion going on: Whether there was an optical illusion as the camera is not aligned with the stumps but is aligned on the batsman and popping crease.. Because from another angle the gloves could be behind.
 
Actually from a straighter angle the gloves are expected to look more in front of the stumps. As mentioned by OP, the camera is on the popping crease not stumps
 
In today's match Paul Reiffel was giving every 50-50 decision in favor of India. The LBW decision of Mohammad Nabi looked more not out than out and it turned to be an umpire's call.
 
Rohit wicket against Australia was umpire call but no one talk about that time
 
1697121188353.png

Seems not out and a mistake

A back of length delivery sliding down leg, Stoinis tried to glance at it and gets some glove through to the keeper. His back hand had come off the handle and that's where the ball struck his glove, but it seemed like the bottom hand was connected to the pinky finger of the top hand glove. So, umpire gives it out.
 
FearlessRoar said:
View attachment 137517

Seems not out and a mistake

A back of length delivery sliding down leg, Stoinis tried to glance at it and gets some glove through to the keeper. His back hand had come off the handle and that's where the ball struck his glove, but it seemed like the bottom hand was connected to the pinky finger of the top hand glove. So, umpire gives it out.
Click to expand...
Yeah, this was a very poor decision. This was clearly not out. there is so much distance between the two hands. Ball touched his bottom hand when that hand was not touching bat. Clearly not out. Umpire did not even take a second look. it was so obvious.
 
This one from Hawk-Eye was shocking. There is no way that this was out; even the commentators were confused


1697124620489.png
 
UNBELIEVABLE !!!

How in earth is that hitting leg stump? That’s not even an umpires call on hitting, and it’s 3 reds !!!

Front foot is out of the crease, there’s a huge distance between impact and the stumps. The impact is very clearly in line with leg stump, so HOW THE HECK DOES THE BALL HOLD ITS LINE?

Lost absolute faith in Hawkeye !

IMG_2813.jpeg
 
YousafTheBeast said:
UNBELIEVABLE !!!

How in earth is that hitting leg stump? That’s not even an umpires call on hitting, and it’s 3 reds !!!

Front foot is out of the crease, there’s a huge distance between impact and the stumps. The impact is very clearly in line with leg stump, so HOW THE HECK DOES THE BALL HOLD ITS LINE?

Lost absolute faith in Hawkeye !

View attachment 137555
Click to expand...
Terrible system. It was not out.
 
FearlessRoar said:
View attachment 137517

Seems not out and a mistake

A back of length delivery sliding down leg, Stoinis tried to glance at it and gets some glove through to the keeper. His back hand had come off the handle and that's where the ball struck his glove, but it seemed like the bottom hand was connected to the pinky finger of the top hand glove. So, umpire gives it out.
Click to expand...


[Reporter:]

What was sort of the umpires explaining to you and Marcus [Stoinis] after that decision was ruled ‘out’ with the caught behind?

[Marnus Labuschagne:]

Look, the umpires really didn't know what was going on. They just saw what we saw, so it wasn't really too much going on. I mean, for me, it looked like, and I was on field, I can't see, but it looked like his hand was off the bat, it hit the glove. And so, because they didn't go to the side-on angle, Marcus and I were just asking, have they checked? Because they just saw the spike from the front on, and they didn't sort of get a close-up zoom in of the side. Well, sorry, not one that we had. And that just looked like there was clear daylight between the two gloves and the handle. But once again, I have been into the third umpire room and the screens are big and everything's much clearer than me standing in the middle looking at a pretty pixelated screen.
 
"Umpires Really Did Not...": Australia Seek Clarity From ICC Over Marcus Stoinis Dismissal

Marnus Labuschagne, who was batting at the non-striker's end, said the team would seek an explanation from the apex body.

The Australian camp was not happy with the third umpire's decision to rule Marcus Stoinis out in the 134-run defeat to South Africa in the World Cup, with batter Marnus Labuschagne and coach Andrew McDonald saying they will seek clarity from the ICC. Stoinis was adjudged out caught behind in the 18th over off a Kagiso Rabada delivery after South Africa reviewed the decision. The Ultra edge showed a spike, as the ball touched Stoinis' bottom hand. But what made things confusing was that Stoinis' top hand left the bat and whether the top and bottom hand were both connected to the bat was debatable.

"You have got to accept the umpire's decision in these moments. I'm sure there will be some sort of explanation coming from the ICC around the dismissal," McDonald said after the game.

Labuschagne, who was batting at the non-striker's end, said the team would seek an explanation from the apex body.

"We will get clarity or will seek clarity because it's the World Cup," Labuschagne said.

"The umpires really did not know what was going on. They saw what we saw so it wasn't too much going on. For me it looked on the field... his hand was off the bat, it hit the glove and because it didn't go to the side on angle Marcus and I were just asking have they checked.

"Because they just checked the spike from the front on. They didn't get the close up, zoom in of the side, that we had and that just looked like there was clear daylight between the two gloves and handle.

"But once again I have been in the third umpire's room and the screen is big, much clear than me watching from the middle in the pixelated screen.

"There was some talk that maybe it hit the handle of the bat. I don't know." Steve Smith was also ruled out after a South Africa review. The umpire was forced to change his decision as the ball tracking technology showed it was hitting the leg stump.

"It's hard to contest technology. There was potential that it was going outside leg but technology had it hitting the stumps.

"Any time Smith and Stoinis are there there's a chance. They are both quality players and given the opportunity, they would have taken the match closer," added McDonald.

NDTV​
 
Warner calls for umpire accuracy stats on big screen

David Warner has called for individual umpire statistics to be shown on the big screen during matches in a bid to improve the accountability of cricket's on-field officials.

Australia have been the victim of multiple controversial calls during the one-day World Cup in India, where reviews have been notably slower than in home matches.

Warner himself was at the centre of one of the debatable decisions against Sri Lanka on Monday, when he was given out lbw by Joel Wilson to a ball angling down leg.

Warner reviewed the decision but ball-tracking showed the Dilshan Madushanka delivery clipping leg stump, with the decision remaining out on umpire's call.

"Players stats go up on the board as you walk out to bat," Warner said.

"When they announce the umpires and they come up on screen, I'd love to see their stats come up on the board as well.

"Over the period of time, obviously players get dropped for poor performances. It's never explained to us about how or what goes on with the (umpire)'s panel.

"(The stats on accuracy ratings) would just be an indicator.

"We check up there sometimes and go 'oh, gee, I'm only averaging that now'. But it's just little things that show the spectators."​

The 36-year-old compared the situation to that of the NRL, where referees are routinely dropped after poor decisions.

Warner said Wilson had told him he believed the ball was swinging back from Madushanka, something the opener said was not at all evident on replays.

Australia's veteran opener also bemoaned the fact it was extremely difficult to overturn an lbw call for a batsman on ball-tracking, given the ball only needs to be clipping the stumps to have the decision stand.

Added to that is a frustration he believes some umpires are far more willing to give batsmen out than others.

"As a player you definitely know which umpires are going to keep those 50-50 ones when you're hit on the pad," Warner said.

"And that's where, from my perspective, it gets frustrating.

"Because you know literally if you get hit on the pad it could be a close one unless it's definitely not out.

"There's no bias in anything. It's just you feel like that as a player sometimes."

After beating Sri Lanka by five wickets on Monday in Lucknow, Australia moved to Bengaluru for Friday's crunch clash with Pakistan.

England and South Africa's shock defeats to Afghanistan and Netherlands respectively have opened the tournament back up, allowing Australia to move back into contention after their two first-up losses to India and South Africa.

"I know at the back end we have Bangladesh and Afghanistan, the hard ones come in between that," Warner said.

"And then you talk about net run-rate as well. There's a few things that can be there at the end.

"But Pakistan is our next game and that's what we'll be throwing all our attention to."

Souce: TheWestAustralian​
 
Why don’t they just hand the cup over to india.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
AAli98 said:
Why don’t they just hand the cup over to india
Click to expand...

I think umpire wanted Virat to get a century as that wide would have made no difference in the outcome of the game anyway.

Also, even if that was called a wide, Virat would have still got a century since he hit that ball for six when 2 runs was required.

1697735806784.png
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Rajdeep said:
I think umpire wanted Virat to get a century as that wide would have made no difference in the outcome of the game anyway.

Also, even if that was called a wide, Virat would have still got a century since he hit that ball for six when 2 runs was required.

View attachment 137881
Click to expand...


The issue isn’t about Kohli getting a century, but with the Umpire favouring one side over the other… what if it was the other way around?

What’s stopping the umpire from doing something similar in another game if nothing is done about this?
 
Who would have thought, Virat would bring such a day in cricket that Pakistan fans would be praying that umpire gives extra runs of Wide to India in a WC game
 
Rajdeep said:
I think umpire wanted Virat to get a century as that wide would have made no difference in the outcome of the game anyway.

Also, even if that was called a wide, Virat would have still got a century since he hit that ball for six when 2 runs was required.

View attachment 137881
Click to expand...
This ain’t no back garden cricket game it’s a World Cup game this umpire should be sent packing.. but icc will give him a promotion.
 
Devadwal said:
Who would have thought, Virat would bring such a day in cricket that Pakistan fans would be praying that umpire gives extra runs of Wide to India in a WC game
Click to expand...
Wow you can’t be serious.

In my view, Virat should have got the century and I’m happy for him. I do not agree however that umpires should EVER be permitted to bend the rules for one team or another, not even if the team benefiting is Pakistan. It is integral to the game that umpires remain neutral and uphold the rules impartially. What we saw today was a partial umpire, who was smirking at the fact that he intentionally did not call a very wide ball. This was clear bias towards team India and, whilst it made no difference to the outcome of the game, it was shocking to see.

No action will be taken, because the game is of course entirely biased towards the financial might of one team.
 
What if a bowler deliberately bowled a wide to a Rizwan or Babar to stop them from getting a milestone? Shouldn't umpires discourage that behaviour through their actions?
 
bala977 said:
What if a bowler deliberately bowled a wide to a Rizwan or Babar to stop them from getting a milestone? Shouldn't umpires discourage that behaviour through their actions?
Click to expand...
Umpire was disgracing Kohlis legacy by pulling a stunt like that.
 
Mohammad Hafeez talking about the transparency in Toss Decisions:

“I was the captain of the 2012 T20 World Cup, I had suggested the Tournament Director to avail the advantage of the Spider-Cam during the toss at the World Cup. The Spider-Cam should show the outcome when the coin landed for more clarity.

“Normally, when the coin spins, it goes five to ten metres away from you, and the captains are sitting out here. I am not casting aspersions on anyone’s credibility. I am not doubting anyone. But if you show the outcome, there will be more clarity for the fans, for the world."

“Now, only the match referee goes and picks up the coin. We have to take the referee’s words on whether it is head or tail.”​
 
After a long wait, the third umpire decides Sadeera Samarawickrama has his fingers under the catch and Woakes had to depart

Screenshot_20231026_175145_X.jpg
 
This was given wide. I think third umpire should also intervene on such calls.

JfTHm0N.jpg
 
Both teams benefitted from umpire's call. RVD looked more not out with ball brely clipping the stumps. Virat Kohli was given out on umpire-call in 2019 world cup semi final. Then he was not out aginst Pakistan but given out.
 
jnaveen1980 said:
Both teams benefitted from umpire's call. RVD looked more not out with ball brely clipping the stumps. Virat Kohli was given out on umpire-call in 2019 world cup semi final. Then he was not out aginst Pakistan but given out.
Click to expand...
True. It is part of the game as the umpire's calls are respected in marginal cases like these.
 
ArabKnight said:
Harbhajan Singh was NOT happy with the last LBW not being given OUT after review.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1717955943512814048
Click to expand...
Harbajan is being a fool. Pakistan got a decision in their favor which had two umpires call yellow lights on it. And still RVD was given out.

The umpires call is there for a reason, and i don't expect a guy like Harbajhan to understand the reason.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Major said:
Harbajan is being a fool. Pakistan got a decision in there favor which had two umpires call yellow lights on it. And still RVD was given out.

THe umpires call is there for a reason, and i dont expect a guy like Harbajhan to understand the reason.
Click to expand...

We dont know the reason for Umpires call.

If the umpire had said it's because of the ball not hitting the stumps then this is fine

But what if the umpire thought it was an inside edge? That cannot be measured against the ball just hitting the stumps, can it?
 
MenInG said:
We dont know the reason for Umpires call.

If the umpire had said it's because of the ball not hitting the stumps then this is fine

But what if the umpire thought it was an inside edge? That cannot be measured against the ball just hitting the stumps, can it?
Click to expand...
that decision never had doubt about inside edge on it.

We had an umpires call go in our favor and we had no issue with that
 
There is no howler. Yes that one was not a wide. But called a wide. If they had taken tactical review that would have been reversed and review would have been retained.
 
Major said:
that decision never had doubt about inside edge on it.

We had an umpires call go in our favor and we had no issue with that
Click to expand...

That's not what the commentators said

They said that most people heard a sound as did Pak players hence the hesitation to use DRS

Also, umpire should make it clear to the 4th why he thinks its out or not out (ICC should make it so for future to remove any doubts)
 
Major said:
that decision never had doubt about inside edge on it.

We had an umpires call go in our favor and we had no issue with that
Click to expand...
No the umpire thought it was an inside edge, but it doesn't really matter.

If he gave it not out, then we have to respect it. According to drs it was his call and he doesn't think its out so we have to respect the decision either way.
 
MenInG said:
That's not what the commentators said

They said that most people heard a sound as did Pak players hence the hesitation to use DRS

Also, umpire should make it clear to the 4th why he thinks its out or not out (ICC should make it so for future to remove any doubts)
Click to expand...
That'll just create more pressure and controversy on umpires.

Like what is he suppose to say? Sorry it was inside edge, oh oops my bad, I made a mistake?

Twitter will go wild over this poor mistake and make memes. Let the umpires be silent and not just raise their finger or shake their heads. No need for any semantical emotional drama
 
"Bad umpiring and bad rules cost Pakistan this game. The ICC should change this rule. If the ball is hitting the stump, whether umpire gave out or not out doesn't matter. Otherwise what is the use of technology?" Harbijan Singh on Haris Rauf's last ball
 
Talking about the Decision Review System (DRS) after the game, former Pakistan captain Moin Khan made serious allegations. While he blamed the umpire for it, Moin added that the clipping shown by the ball-tracker was wrong.

"It was umpire's mistake. He (Shamsi) should have been given out. At the point of impact, the leg-stump was visible. It was clearly out, and the umpire should've raised his finger. It could've gone down for referral then. I feel the clipping was shown wrong. The full ball was hitting the leg-stump," Moin said on A Sports.

Former Pakistan captain Misbah-ul-Haq also threw light on the issue by appealing for a change in decision-making.

"Umpire's call is a big issue that needs to be sorted out. If it shows that it's out, and the umpire has given it not out, then it should be given out. If you have to stay with umpire's decision, then what's the point," said Misbah.

NDTV​
 
MenInG said:
That's not what the commentators said

They said that most people heard a sound as did Pak players hence the hesitation to use DRS

Also, umpire should make it clear to the 4th why he thinks its out or not out (ICC should make it so for future to remove any doubts)
Click to expand...
So there should be clear appeal for one type of dismissal only.
There should be no check for lbw and catch on the same delivery?
 
FearlessRoar said:
This dissmisal of Henrich Klaasen will definitely ignite DRS discussion. .

As from naked eye Klaasen looks not out
Click to expand...
Sharma wasn't convinced at all... Tendulkar v Ajmal vibes?. Wasn't implausible but thought it would be umpire's call
 
We have had some incidents involving the umpires including the one we had today with the dismissal of Angelo Mathews. In my opinion, Mathews did reach the crease in time and was almost ready to face the ball before his helmet strip was broke. The umpires should have handled the situation better I guess.
 
FYI

The English duo of Richard Illingworth and Richard Kettleborough will be the on-field umpires for the ICC Men’s Cricket World Cup 2023 final between India and Australia in Ahmedabad.

This will be the second time Kettleborough would be in the middle for the showpiece occasion. The 50-year-old previously stood alongside Kumar Dharmasena in the 2015 final, which saw Australia overcome New Zealand at the MCG.

More than 93,000 spectators watched on that occasion and a three-figure crowd is expected tomorrow as the host nation look to replicate the Indian team of 2011 and lift the World Cup on home soil.

Illingworth and Kettleborough, who were promoted to the ICC International List on the same day in November 2009, both acted as on-field umpires during this week’s semi-finals. Illingworth oversaw India’s victory over New Zealand, with Kettleborough in charge of Australia’s thrilling win against South Africa.

Both men are previous winners of the David Shepherd Trophy, awarded to the ICC’s Umpire of the Year.

Kettleborough, who reached a century of ODIs as an umpire earlier in the tournament when Netherlands took on Sri Lanka, took home the prize in three consecutive years between 2013 and 2015 and Illingworth added his name to the illustrious list in 2019 and 2022.

On Sunday, the pair will be joined by Joel Wilson as third umpire, fourth umpire Chris Gaffaney and match referee Andy Pycroft, all of whom were part of the officiating teams across the semi-finals.

Match officials for ICC Men’s Cricket World Cup 2023 final: India v Australia, Ahmedabad, 19 November

  • On-field Umpires: Richard Illingworth & Richard Kettleborough
  • Third Umpire: Joel Wilson
  • Fourth Umpire: Chris Gaffaney
  • Match Referee: Andy Pycroft
 
Umpires being booed by the few fans left in the stadium.

Poor stuff!

Sore losers mentality that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Runner Up
Time to bring AI into Cricket: Can It replace DRS and ensure error-free umpiring?
Replies
10
Views
607
DeadlyVenom
D
A
Is the ICC Champions Trophy a tougher tournament than the ICC World Cup?
Replies
33
Views
2K
Aham Brahmasmi
A
The Bald Eagle
Will Indian team boycott matches against Pakistan in Asia Cup 2025 and T20 World Cup 2026?
3 4 5
Replies
363
Views
7K
DeadlyVenom
D
Ball Blazer
ICC Annual Meeting 2025 outcomes: USA cricket on notice, Afghan women backed, and much more
Replies
15
Views
363
DeadlyVenom
D
FearlessRoar
ICC Champions Trophy 2025: South Africa announce a 15-member squad
Replies
23
Views
1K
FearlessRoar
FearlessRoar
Back
Top