ICC to review no-ball policy

In light of Richard Illingworth's incorrect no-ball call during the first Test between New Zealand and Australia, the ICC have announced that they will review the no-ball policy with the possibility of removing all calls from off the field. I think this is a good move. No-balls have gone uncalled for such a long time now that this would seem like the logical move. It takes the pressure off the on-field umpire who has enough to worry about as it is.

Quote:"The third umpire can review the fairness of a delivery on the fall of a wicket but not review a no-ball that has been called on the field. The ICC Cricket Committee has discussed this issue on a number of occasions and come to the same conclusion each time – it is not right that a batsman plays a delivery that is illegal, only to be told retrospectively that it was legal and that he is out by a mode of dismissal that would not have been allowed from an illegal delivery."

...

The Marylebone Cricket Club's World Cricket Committee received a report from former ICC umpires manager Simon Taufel last year that recommended the video umpire monitor no-balls.

"Maybe that's something that needs to be looked at just to make sure that you get the right decision all the time," McCullum said.

"I'm guessing it's probably a bit easier as well for an umpire to look at the other end rather than to look down and then look back up as well but other people will make those decisions."

http://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/cricket/769...-the-field

The noball decision is pretty reall time and it can greatly affect how the batsman plays the ball. But the main point of this discussion should be why do we need technology for something as trivial as no balls? For a century and a quarter umpires have called no balls without using any technology; even when TV replays started umpires were still pretty accurate about it. Maybe ICC should see why their best umpires are making such elementary mistakes.

[quote author=thedeatheater1410 link=topic=102741.msg679000#msg679000 date=1455604521]
The noball decision is pretty reall time and it can greatly affect how the batsman plays the ball. But the main point of this discussion should be why do we need technology for something as trivial as no balls? For a century and a quarter umpires have called no balls without using any technology; even when TV replays started umpires were still pretty accurate about it. Maybe ICC should see why their best umpires are making such elementary mistakes.
[/quote]
I think there are a number of factors at play. Firstly, I feel that the scrutiny umpires are currently under due to DRS, their sole focus is on the action in front of them and not at the ground. Secondly, the position umpires stand is not ideal to make a live no-ball call. And thirdly, the unique and unorthodox bowling actions that we see today add to the difficulty in getting the call right.

There was a nice piece by ESPN last year that took a deeper look into this:

Quote: Have a look at the photographs below. They are of current international bowlers (but not from international games), taken from the point of view of the umpire. They were first shown last year, at an ICC briefing, and are published here courtesy the ICC.

Note how it is not just difficult but actually impossible to know - to any degree of certainty - whether the deliveries are legal or not in these instances. Note also that this is a still image that you can stare at as long as you want, and not a split-second blur of movement about to initiate a sequence of events 22 yards away that you really need to be observing as diligently. Note also that these are not bowlers with particularly unusual actions.

To think, one, that they are easy to spot, and two, that umpires have stopped checking on-field is wrong. Checking the line at delivery and then looking up is a routine built into umpires from whenever they begin umpiring - it is ingrained as much as the technical habits of players are. It does not just stop, even with the safety net of technology.

It is a good move I think. But call a no ball is make batsman try and think differently. Calling the 3rd umpire for decision will not give that advantage to the batsman at all. You can see all the ICC T20 world cup matches and all other matches online here. http://www.cybercric.info

While I do think that it's right to review the no ball call, I think all the rules of the game should constantly be under review in fact on a rolling basis so they're always up to date.

The no ball will always be a tricky call to make though, and the best they can do is to try and make sure they call it correctly, rather than maybe changing the rules altogether.

Wid da way Rastas now playin' cricket not a problem of "no ball" but "no BALLS" 

I rather keep the ump in the game

It's all about the technology.Technology is a wonderful intervention, however, it has it's dark side; reducing the need for the human factor thus putting many people out of a job. There may come a time when the technology would be set up on the field with a reviewer in the stands, thus eliminating the need for umpires. I don't think this is a far-fetched observation, seeing how the role of the umpire has been gradually diminished over the years.

Well its 90 overs per day times = 540 deliveries

times 5 days Test =  2,700

thats a lotta balls for an Umpire to keep EYE on !

there will be errors. 

"that's a lotta balls for an Umpire to keep EYE on"....he 'n 40YOVs ONLY ones!  ::yawn:: ::yawn:: ::yawn::