mukka on the front foot

Mukka has called for reviews of called no balls so in future incorrect calls can be overturned.

However the calling out of - no ball- can influence shot selection. While clearly Voges decision to leave the ball was not influenced by the call, others may not be. Interested in Embees thoughts.

Richie was keen on returning to the back foot rule. RBs view was it was easier for umps to police and that it gave batsmen a split second longer to adjust their shot. Against this was the practice of landing the back foot behind the crease but dragging it through.I remember Gordon Rorke being the master of the drag.

Thoughts.

No, still need some on field element to decision making. Just diminishes the role of the on field umpire.

Aye. Am opposed to the review because of the influence a call can have on shot selection.

I would like to see the back foot rule trialled.

I'm a couple of years too young to have seen Gordon 'Carlotta' Rorke and his crowd, I read all the time how he 'dragged' his back foot, which let him 'bowl from eighteen yards', but I can't get any kind of visual on what he actually did, how it was supposed to help, how he stayed balanced in the process and didn't ruin other parts of his action.

Fred, Rorke was a big bloke with a big front leg delivery stride. Suspect his action must have placed massive pressure on his back and joints. Don't think he had a long career.

He frightened the Poms as he was swift and they argued the back foot rule advantaged him. As was standard in those days when the Poms faced a dangerous quick, they questioned Rorkes action. Charlie Griffith and of course Meckiff were others.

horrie

im in favour of getting as much right as possible

so a 3rd umpire back up call on no balls isnt really a problem

I would review every dismissal ...and anything i thought close

the only negative to that is the extra time that would take ...apparently

not sure what a few extra minutes means in a game that takes 5 days and is not guaranteed a result

Fred Nerk wrote:I'm a couple of years too young to have seen Gordon 'Carlotta' Rorke and his crowd, I read all the time how he 'dragged' his back foot, which let him 'bowl from eighteen yards', but I can't get any kind of visual on what he actually did, how it was supposed to help, how he stayed balanced in the process and didn't ruin other parts of his action.

Geoff Lawson was another notable back foot dragger.

.

The ICC has said no to overruling of incorrect no-ball calls due to the alleged "change of shot" factor.

Still would like s trial of the back foot rule.

skully wrote:The ICC has said no to overruling of incorrect no-ball calls due to the alleged "change of shot" factor.

good. they got something right for a change

only way every no ball call can be guaranteed correct is if the on field umps dont call them. the batters play each ball on its merits and the 3rd ump checks every ball on screen and uses a light on the scoreboard to notify the on field umps of illegalities

that might be the way to go; if so the penalty for every no ball needs to be greater. Make them 5 runs, that'll stop them ...

You simply can't call a ball 'no ball' on the field, and then rescind that. Mind you it should never happen in the first place.

Ethics? The Gall! wrote:

skully wrote:The ICC has said no to overruling of incorrect no-ball calls due to the alleged "change of shot" factor.

good.  they got something right for a change

only way every no ball call can be guaranteed correct is if the on field umps dont call them.  the batters play each ball on its merits and the 3rd ump checks every ball on screen and uses a light on the scoreboard to notify the on field umps of illegalities

I think I suggested that about 4/5 years back.

Not your best idea.

Luckily others seem to agree with me. Far better than the back foot rule which was changed for a reason.

No offence Nige but I prefer Benauds sagacity on this matter..

horace wrote:No offence Nige but I prefer Benauds sagacity on this matter..

No problem, the fact that virtually no one else agreed with him for over 50 years is meaningless.

So you have done apoll? Results are where

horace wrote:So you have done apoll? Results are where

Horrie, name another player or ex-player who would revert to the back-foot rule. Richie was out on his own on this one.

Basil wrote:

horace wrote:So you have done apoll? Results are where

Horrie, name another player or ex-player who would revert to the back-foot rule. Richie was out on his own on this one.

Rod Marsh. Apparently we will now see horrie preferring Marsh's sagacity on this and other matters in future.

embee wrote:horrie

im in favour of getting as much right as possible

so a 3rd umpire back up call on no balls isnt really a problem

I would review every dismissal ...and anything i thought close

the only negative to that is the extra time that would take ...apparently

not sure what a few extra minutes means in a game that takes 5 days and is not guaranteed a result

This.

If it's even close, don't bother calling, wait for a review of the wicket.

Brass Monkey wrote:

embee wrote:horrie

im in favour of getting as much right as possible

so a 3rd umpire back up call on no balls isnt really a problem

I would review every dismissal ...and anything i thought close

the only negative to that is the extra time that would take ...apparently

not sure what a few extra minutes means in a game that takes 5 days and is not guaranteed a result

This.

If it's even close, don't bother calling, wait for a review of the wicket.

Not even sure if would waste much time. Put a static camera on the front line. If it is anywhere near debatable the 3 umpire can review even before the bowler reaches his mark.

Lehmann has suggested that the square leg umpire calls no balls.

At the moment with umpires reluctant to call them, there could be valuable runs being overlooked if it came to a close contest. It then seems unfair that they're only checked on wickets. There must be a system which has greater equality and accuracy as an outcome.

I think chappelli also supports.....oh well

How on earth is the square leg umpire supposed to call front foot no balls? Is the suggestion that the third umpire advises the square leg umpire? I don't get this ... having done loads of umpiring I really can't see how the square leg can do it accurately in real time.