From: ABEGLEY@ccmail.sunysb.edu (Anthony M. Begley)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
Subject: English umpiring
Date: 28 Jul 1992 12:44:51 -0500
Organization: State University of New York, Stony Brook
NNTP-Posting-Host: cs.utexas.edu
X-Unparseable-Date: 28 Jul 1992 13:43:51 -0400 (EDT)


               State University of New York at Stony Brook
                       Stony Brook, NY 11794-2275

                                            Anthony M. Begley
                                            Materials Science
                                            516 632-8516
                                            28-Jul-1992 01:42pm EDT
FROM:  ABEGLEY
TO:    Remote Addressee                     ( _rec-sport-cricket@cs.utexas.edu )

SUBJECT: English umpiring                                             



Dear All,

Thanks to all those involved in reporting another exciting test. I wont say
anything about that deluded :--) supporter who thought Pakistan were the 
greatest team in modern history.

Mostly very sensible analysis of the game I thought. The fickle cloud cover
making Miandads decision to bat first unfortunate. As has been pointed out 
the wicket was prepared for a result (it always is at headingly) and England
picked the perfect bowlers to achieve it. Some would argue that adapting
your pitch to suit your bowlers is cheating but what do you expect when England
only produces medium pace swing (but mostly seam) bowlers. The Headingly pitch 
and conditions were just perfect for the England seamers who bowl a good line 
and length, but not as suited to the Pakistani quickies. Although all the luck
seemed to have gone Englands way.

People are right when they say the English attack is mild (Pringle, mallender,
Lewis, Munton are all trundlers who would never bowl a good side out twice
on a respectable wicket). I still feel the Oval will be more suitable to the
Pakistan attack. However, we shall see.


>
>|> Two years ago when Gooch was LBW to Terry Alderman in almost every innings, 
>|> I heard several people making the preposterous claim that English umpires were so
>|> fair that sometimes visiting teams got the advantage over England. 
>
>	I do not see why the claim was so 'preposterous'.  There is no 
>	doubt that the fairness of the Umpires was an important factor
>	in rewarding the Australian bowler.
>
> The claim is preposterous because if "English umpires are the best in the world" then 
> nobody, visiting or home, should be able to get an advantage. Hope that is 
> clear now. 

This is rather a silly argument, altogether. What should really be implied is
that England was disadvantaged because it didnt have a bowler of the quality of
Alderman. Only in England did Alderman get the perfect conditions to suit his
beautiful action. Thus only the English umpires were tested as to their strength
of character in giving so many LBW decisions impartially. It was just a case
of a great bowler, admirably suited to the conditions, having a fantastic summer
and a certain lack of old fashioned batting technique shown by most of the 
English team. This was acknowledged at the time and I dont remember any 
complaints about the umpiring. Dont forget that there are very few batsmen
in the world today that would have the proper technique to defend against Terry
Aldermans late swing and seam (such is modern cricket). 

> Nobody is talking about  English umpires cheating: the original
> postings all talked about the English Cricket establishment's claim
> that English umpires are the best in the world, 

They are THOUGHT to be the best in the world because the best umpire
is the consistent one who has the most experience at the highest level.
Some English umpires qualify on this. Lets try to avoid the old sweeping
generalisations.

>that TV replays 
> show that they do make mistakes as everybody else, 

Well, what a surprise !! Of course they do -- noone can be questioning this,
surely. As an aside I hope everyone criticizing umpiring decisions has 
actually umpired themselves in a game. Im sure we all know how difficult it
is in the heat of the moment, especially 2 foot short run outs !

>that if a Pakistani/Indian umpire
> makes a mistake it is dubbed as cheating by visiting Aussie and English
> sides, their estab and their media

I feel this is a tremendous generalisation. Forgive me if Im wrong but the 
incidents of complaints about cheating umpires are not commonplace on Englands
tours. We are all remebering the gatting-Rana episode alone. I agree that
in the heat of a tight match everyone can lose a little control, and that
the gutter press of all nations are the trouble makers.

> , and that this duplicity generates ill-feelings
> in players which can be removed by employing third country umpires.

I would agree that although it will not remove all the problems generated by
the nature of umpiring and cricket itself, 3rd country umpires would overall
help the game rather than hinder it.

>	--SAN

Looking forward to Minor Counties vs the Pak -- any one going to Marlow because
Id like a match report from my old stamping ground.

Tony

PS Say hello to my Mum for me, will you.