The pitching outside leg stump LBW law
+16
Zat
lardbucket
Blackadder
Merlin
Hass
doremi
spangler
JGK
ten years after
PeterCS
Eric Air Emu
tac
Chivalry Augustus
OP Tipping
skully
beamer
20 posters
Page 1 of 3
Page 1 of 3 • 1, 2, 3
The pitching outside leg stump LBW law
As every regular cricket watcher (apart from maybe Russell Tiffin) knows, you can't be LBW if the ball pitches outside leg stump. I guess the reason for this law is to discourage negative leg-side bowling, though I've never seen a clear explanation of why it's there.
As we've seen on many occasions it makes it very difficult for right-arm over bowlers to get LBW decisions against left-handed batsmen. With the balance of power so strongly with the bat right now, is it time for a change? Perhaps just allowing it if it pitches outside leg then hits in line, for example. After all the laws have evolved over the years, I believe there was a time when you couldn't be LBW if it pitched outside off either, and the "hitting outside off and not playing a shot" I believe is relatively recent.
Would such a change have any unintended consequences, like making spinners who turn the ball away from the bat totally unplayable, or encouraging negative lines? Or is it something the law-makers should consider?
As we've seen on many occasions it makes it very difficult for right-arm over bowlers to get LBW decisions against left-handed batsmen. With the balance of power so strongly with the bat right now, is it time for a change? Perhaps just allowing it if it pitches outside leg then hits in line, for example. After all the laws have evolved over the years, I believe there was a time when you couldn't be LBW if it pitched outside off either, and the "hitting outside off and not playing a shot" I believe is relatively recent.
Would such a change have any unintended consequences, like making spinners who turn the ball away from the bat totally unplayable, or encouraging negative lines? Or is it something the law-makers should consider?
beamer- Number of posts : 15399
Reputation : 74
Registration date : 2007-09-03
Flag/Background :
Re: The pitching outside leg stump LBW law
Smug Spiv Geoff Lawson has been arguing for this law change for ages. Can't say I disagree. If it hits the batman in line and would've hit the stumps - on ya bike.
skully- Number of posts : 105795
Age : 112
Reputation : 246
Registration date : 2007-08-31
Flag/Background :
Re: The pitching outside leg stump LBW law
Yep.
Except I would not require it to hit the batsman in line.
Except I would not require it to hit the batsman in line.
OP Tipping- Number of posts : 4680
Reputation : 41
Registration date : 2008-01-10
Flag/Background :
Re: The pitching outside leg stump LBW law
Shut up the lot of ya. You're ruining cricket.
Chivalry Augustus- Number of posts : 4864
Age : 35
Reputation : 6
Registration date : 2007-09-04
Flag/Background :
Re: The pitching outside leg stump LBW law
And Tests with 17 wickets in 5 days aren't?Augustus wrote:Shut up the lot of ya. You're ruining cricket.
beamer- Number of posts : 15399
Reputation : 74
Registration date : 2007-09-03
Flag/Background :
Re: The pitching outside leg stump LBW law
beamer wrote:And Tests with 17 wickets in 5 days aren't?Augustus wrote:Shut up the lot of ya. You're ruining cricket.
And changing the lbw law's going to change the result of these Tests?
I'm happy enough with cricket in terms of the laws at the moment. We just need some good pitches for once.
Chivalry Augustus- Number of posts : 4864
Age : 35
Reputation : 6
Registration date : 2007-09-04
Flag/Background :
Re: The pitching outside leg stump LBW law
Just an idea to give the bowlers a bit of much-needed help. I'd say start with allowing hitting in line after pitching outside leg, before going the whole way which might make a good leg-spinner completely unplayable.
beamer- Number of posts : 15399
Reputation : 74
Registration date : 2007-09-03
Flag/Background :
Re: The pitching outside leg stump LBW law
So your great solution is french cricket, make the bowler aim to hit the batsman's legs. Sounds absolutely ****** riveting.
Chivalry Augustus- Number of posts : 4864
Age : 35
Reputation : 6
Registration date : 2007-09-04
Flag/Background :
Re: The pitching outside leg stump LBW law
And the difference from it hitting the batsman's legs when it pitches outside off is... :?:Augustus wrote:So your great solution is french cricket, make the bowler aim to hit the batsman's legs. Sounds absolutely ****** riveting.
beamer- Number of posts : 15399
Reputation : 74
Registration date : 2007-09-03
Flag/Background :
Re: The pitching outside leg stump LBW law
you're bowling at the stumps and not the batsman. give them the whole pitch to aim at and you bowl for his legs and not the stumps.
Chivalry Augustus- Number of posts : 4864
Age : 35
Reputation : 6
Registration date : 2007-09-04
Flag/Background :
Re: The pitching outside leg stump LBW law
Well if it's LBW it has to be going on to hit the stumps anyway, remember... otherwise it's LBK (leg before keeper) or LBB (leg before boundary) which wasn't a method of dismissal last time I looked!Augustus wrote:you're bowling at the stumps and not the batsman. give them the whole pitch to aim at and you bowl for his legs and not the stumps.
beamer- Number of posts : 15399
Reputation : 74
Registration date : 2007-09-03
Flag/Background :
Re: The pitching outside leg stump LBW law
beamer wrote:And the difference from it hitting the batsman's legs when it pitches outside off is... :?:Augustus wrote:So your great solution is french cricket, make the bowler aim to hit the batsman's legs. Sounds absolutely ****** riveting.
By the nature of the batting stance, batsmen have limited ability to play a ball coming in to them from out side the leg stump . . . . the pads get in the way. The stance has been designed to defend against straight balls or those coming in from the off stump . . . have you never batted in a game?
tac- Number of posts : 19270
Reputation : 24
Registration date : 2007-08-31
Flag/Background :
Re: The pitching outside leg stump LBW law
And world-class batsmen don't have the ability to adapt?tac wrote:beamer wrote:And the difference from it hitting the batsman's legs when it pitches outside off is... :?:Augustus wrote:So your great solution is french cricket, make the bowler aim to hit the batsman's legs. Sounds absolutely ****** riveting.
By the nature of the batting stance, batsmen have limited ability to play a ball coming in to them from out side the leg stump . . . . the pads get in the way. The stance has been designed to defend against straight balls or those coming in from the off stump . . . have you never batted in a game?
beamer- Number of posts : 15399
Reputation : 74
Registration date : 2007-09-03
Flag/Background :
Re: The pitching outside leg stump LBW law
beamer wrote:And world-class batsmen don't have the ability to adapt?tac wrote:beamer wrote:And the difference from it hitting the batsman's legs when it pitches outside off is... :?:Augustus wrote:So your great solution is french cricket, make the bowler aim to hit the batsman's legs. Sounds absolutely ****** riveting.
By the nature of the batting stance, batsmen have limited ability to play a ball coming in to them from out side the leg stump . . . . the pads get in the way. The stance has been designed to defend against straight balls or those coming in from the off stump . . . have you never batted in a game?
To balls pitching a foot outside leg spinning in and hitting their pad to be given out? Think about what position you'd have to be in to defend against that . . . it would become, as Gussie rightly suggested, French cricket. FFS, beamer, think about this stuff before you start dribbling on . . . .
tac- Number of posts : 19270
Reputation : 24
Registration date : 2007-08-31
Flag/Background :
Re: The pitching outside leg stump LBW law
I wasn't referring to balls pitching a foot outside leg FFS. And isn't it about phucking time something was done about the balance between bat and ball... otherwise we may as well just give up on the other forms of the game and play T20 all the time like the fraudster Stanford wants?
And anyway, you Aussies have had the best leg-spinner in the last half-century at least. You wouldn't have been complaining if they had dropped that rule 10 years ago.
And anyway, you Aussies have had the best leg-spinner in the last half-century at least. You wouldn't have been complaining if they had dropped that rule 10 years ago.
beamer- Number of posts : 15399
Reputation : 74
Registration date : 2007-09-03
Flag/Background :
Re: The pitching outside leg stump LBW law
beamer wrote:Just an idea to give the bowlers a bit of much-needed help. I'd say start with allowing hitting in line after pitching outside leg, before going the whole way which might make a good leg-spinner completely unplayable.
beamer wrote:I wasn't referring to balls pitching a foot outside leg FFS. And isn't it about phucking time something was done about the balance between bat and ball... otherwise we may as well just give up on the other forms of the game and play T20 all the time like the fraudster Stanford wants?
And anyway, you Aussies have had the best leg-spinner in the last half-century at least. You wouldn't have been complaining if they had dropped that rule 10 years ago.
You're too farkin subtle for me, beamer . . .
tac- Number of posts : 19270
Reputation : 24
Registration date : 2007-08-31
Flag/Background :
Re: The pitching outside leg stump LBW law
[This is Rachel]
100 years ago there were virtually no LBWs because any sort of pad play was considered against the spirit of the game. Some batsmen refused to even wear pads.
By the 1930s, things had got bad so they introduced an experimental Law into County cricket whereby you could be out LBW even if you snicked the ball. This was designed to encourage more positive play by the batsmen, but only lasted a couple of seasons because, well, being out LBW when you have hit the ball is a bit bonkers, isn't it?
Another major change took place in the 1960s, following Cowdrey and, um, possibly Hutton padding away Ramadhin and Valentine all the livelong day for an entire series. It was then that the 'not playing a shot' part of the Law was introduced.
But to allow LBWs for a ball pitching outside leg stump would be an extremely negative move for cricket. Cricket is a 'sideways on' game, as tac and others have said. If you want to encourage bowlers to bowl it down the leg side, that's the way to do it. Would be f*cking boring cricket though. Or else batsmen would evolve, as you say, beamer. Did you ever see Peter Willey bat? It wasn't pretty.
100 years ago there were virtually no LBWs because any sort of pad play was considered against the spirit of the game. Some batsmen refused to even wear pads.
By the 1930s, things had got bad so they introduced an experimental Law into County cricket whereby you could be out LBW even if you snicked the ball. This was designed to encourage more positive play by the batsmen, but only lasted a couple of seasons because, well, being out LBW when you have hit the ball is a bit bonkers, isn't it?
Another major change took place in the 1960s, following Cowdrey and, um, possibly Hutton padding away Ramadhin and Valentine all the livelong day for an entire series. It was then that the 'not playing a shot' part of the Law was introduced.
But to allow LBWs for a ball pitching outside leg stump would be an extremely negative move for cricket. Cricket is a 'sideways on' game, as tac and others have said. If you want to encourage bowlers to bowl it down the leg side, that's the way to do it. Would be f*cking boring cricket though. Or else batsmen would evolve, as you say, beamer. Did you ever see Peter Willey bat? It wasn't pretty.
Eric Air Emu- Number of posts : 1954
Reputation : 8
Registration date : 2007-09-10
Flag/Background :
Re: The pitching outside leg stump LBW law
If it pitches a foot outside and hits in front then either it's clearly missing off, or spinning so much nobody has a clue where it's going, or the batsman's so far back he deserves to be out anyway!
beamer- Number of posts : 15399
Reputation : 74
Registration date : 2007-09-03
Flag/Background :
Re: The pitching outside leg stump LBW law
[This is Rachel]
ps. This idea must be mental to have me agreeing with tac.
ps. This idea must be mental to have me agreeing with tac.
Eric Air Emu- Number of posts : 1954
Reputation : 8
Registration date : 2007-09-10
Flag/Background :
Re: The pitching outside leg stump LBW law
Run rates would also be well down and metronomic bowlers would thrive pegging the line on leg-stump. 7 - 3 on-side field with the bowler hitting on or around leg stump. Maybe a leg slip in place instead of a slip.
It would alter the game.
It would alter the game.
Chivalry Augustus- Number of posts : 4864
Age : 35
Reputation : 6
Registration date : 2007-09-04
Flag/Background :
Re: The pitching outside leg stump LBW law
beamer wrote:If it pitches a foot outside and hits in front then either it's clearly missing off, or spinning so much nobody has a clue where it's going, or the batsman's so far back he deserves to be out anyway!
WTF?
tac- Number of posts : 19270
Reputation : 24
Registration date : 2007-08-31
Flag/Background :
Re: The pitching outside leg stump LBW law
Want a diagram FFS?tac wrote:beamer wrote:If it pitches a foot outside and hits in front then either it's clearly missing off, or spinning so much nobody has a clue where it's going, or the batsman's so far back he deserves to be out anyway!
WTF?
beamer- Number of posts : 15399
Reputation : 74
Registration date : 2007-09-03
Flag/Background :
Re: The pitching outside leg stump LBW law
beamer wrote:Want a diagram FFS?tac wrote:beamer wrote:If it pitches a foot outside and hits in front then either it's clearly missing off, or spinning so much nobody has a clue where it's going, or the batsman's so far back he deserves to be out anyway!
WTF?
I'm not sure you could farkin draw one . . . .
tac- Number of posts : 19270
Reputation : 24
Registration date : 2007-08-31
Flag/Background :
Re: The pitching outside leg stump LBW law
[This is Rachel]
tac,
I think beamer is trying to say that such balls, although probably going on to hit according to the laws of physics, would never be given out by an umpire on the field of play.
I think he is missing the more fundamental point that such balls would be called as Wides.
tac,
I think beamer is trying to say that such balls, although probably going on to hit according to the laws of physics, would never be given out by an umpire on the field of play.
I think he is missing the more fundamental point that such balls would be called as Wides.
Eric Air Emu- Number of posts : 1954
Reputation : 8
Registration date : 2007-09-10
Flag/Background :
Re: The pitching outside leg stump LBW law
*
Last edited by beamer on Sun 08 Mar 2009, 00:30; edited 1 time in total
beamer- Number of posts : 15399
Reputation : 74
Registration date : 2007-09-03
Flag/Background :
Page 1 of 3 • 1, 2, 3
Page 1 of 3
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
|
|
Today at 18:07 by skully
» ***Sheffield Shield Final, Wozzie Crabs v Tenuous Tozzies, WACA, 21-25 March, 2024***
Tue 26 Mar 2024, 10:25 by lardbucket
» Jonny watch
Tue 26 Mar 2024, 10:08 by lardbucket
» skully's blog
Tue 26 Mar 2024, 03:29 by skully
» Bangladesh v Sri Lanka, 1st Test, Sylhet, 22 - 26 March, 2024
Mon 25 Mar 2024, 14:46 by skully
» Current International One Day Cricket
Mon 25 Mar 2024, 12:56 by Lost Wombat
» Formula One World Championship
Mon 25 Mar 2024, 03:15 by lardbucket
» AFL 2024
Sun 24 Mar 2024, 06:22 by horace
» Rugby League 2024
Sat 23 Mar 2024, 14:50 by skully