From: anw@maths.nott.ac.uk (Dr A. N. Walker)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
Subject: Re: Excitement and Controversy
Date: 29 Jul 92 15:02:32 GMT
Reply-To: anw@maths.nott.ac.uk (Dr A. N. Walker)
Organization: Maths Dept., Nott'm Univ., UK.

In article <1992Jul29.002708.17363@dmpe.csiro.au>
mohan@phi.mel.dms.CSIRO.AU (Mohan Krishnamoorthy) writes about the
Gooch run-out decision:

>I saw the same replay that Kre did (presumably) and I thought it was a
>terrible decision.

	What you possibly didn't see [and certainly those listening to the
radio didn't see!] was the second replay.

	As the event actually happened, there was an excited appeal from
the nearby Pakistani fielders;  the decision was "not out", and this was
[very correctly] accepted instantly by everyone, fielders and commentators
alike.  Cut to slow-motion replay from the square-leg camera, with Richie
Benaud saying something like "If the throw had been a bit closer ... umm
... well perhaps it *was* close enough" as the replay froze on a frame with
Gooch still a foot out and a bail already flying.

	A couple of balls later, RB said "Back to that incident -- this is
what the umpire would have seen at full speed", followed by a replay.  This
time, the incident was a complete blur, and even though I *knew* Gooch was
out, it looked *to* *me* as though he was in.  Commentary: "That shows how
difficult these decisions are."  The second replay was not shown in the
edited highlights.  My impression was that RB [as close as we get to a
third-country adjudicator!] had no criticism to make, even after watching
the replay, of the umpire.

	Summary:  in my view, a mistaken decision, but not "terrible".

	[Compare, for example, one of Mervyn Kitchen's LBW decisions, of
which Geoff Boycott said "The only reason why that could have been given
not out is that the ball pitched outside leg" (A strange statement!  He
might as well have said that the only reason he wasn't bowled was that the
ball missed the stumps.), with the clear implication that GB thought it
*was* out.]

>						 umpiring mistakes (and
>let there be no doubt about the term `mistakes' here) by different
>umpires (Rana Vs Palmer for example)

	I don't think anyone should actually condone bad behaviour by
the players involved in the various incidents that have been discussed
ad nauseam recently [and in the Gooch runout, everyone behaved impeccably].
On the other hand, I'd hate cricket to become so anaemic that tempers never
boiled over;  I believe that when bad [or thought to be bad] decisions are
given, and a player over-reacts, the matter should be dealt with, as far as
possible on the spot, and then "forgotten".

	However, the Gatting-Rana incident was not quite in the same
category.  There was no mistaken decision [though earlier decisions *had*
been disputed]:  the immediate cause of the flare-up was that Mr Rana called
Mr Gatting a cheat [for moving a fielder (allegedly) in a surreptitious way];
MG replied in similar vein, with the consequences we all saw.

	The rights and wrongs of this, I am happy to leave to the tabloids;
and again Mike Gatting was wrong to stand there in a slanging match with the
umpire, but I would condemn neither MG nor SR for losing their cool in the
heat of the moment.  The trouble is that it's hard to see how a match can
continue in such circumstances.  Possibly MG should simply have taken his
team off the field (*before* the slanging match) and left the diplomats to
sort things out, but it's not clear that the long-term effects would have
been any better.

-- 
Andy Walker, Maths Dept., Nott'm Univ., UK.
anw@maths.nott.ac.uk
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket