Confusion Over l.b.w. Rule

Press, Volume CIX, Issue 32127, 24 October 1969, Page 13

Confusion Over l.b.w. Rule

A meeting called by the Canterbury Cricket Umpires’ Association on Wednesday night to clarify for senior players the experimental lbw rule introduced this season failed to achieve its objective because of lack of support by players.

In spite of being freely advertised, the meeting attracted only one senior player,

the West Chrlstchurch-Uni-versity captain, P. A. Sharp. One other club, Old Collegians, had five representatives but none are playing in the senior grade.

Under the new rule a batsman cannot be given out lbw to a ball pitched outside the off-stump if the umpire believes that the batsman has made a genuine attempt to play a shot. During the opening round of competition matches, which ended last Saturday, there appeared confusion among both players and umpires as to the interpretations of the rule. The fact that more than three times as many appeals for lbw were upheld in the opening round this year compared with last season has raised the question of whether the increase is attributable to the new rule. Umpires at this week’s meeting were of the opinion that the increase was merely coincidental and one umpire said he knew of three

Italians Top Club Team

(N.Z .P. A.-Reuter-Copyright) BUENOS AIRES.

A.C. Milan, of Italy, won the world soccer club’s championship yesterday in spite of going down. 1-2, to Estudiantes, of Argentina, in the sec-ond-leg match. The Italian team, holder of the European Cup, won on goal average, having beaten the South American titleholders, 3-0, in the firset leg in Milan an October 8.

instances where appeals were not made because of the new rule, but which under the old rule would have been successful.

Sharp said yesterday he did not believe that the rule, which is aimed primarily at reducing excessive pad play, had the same relevance in New Zealand as in England where batsmen were more renowned for using their pads to excess. So far, very few batsmen had made adjustments to their techniques to meet the new law and likewise bowlers were bowling much the same as before, he said.

At the meeting, Sharp, an off-spin bowler himself, said the new rule had made things more difficult for the bowler who brings the ball in from outside the off-stump.

Mr S. C, Quillen, a member of the umpires’ association, countered by saying that offspin bowlers were still better off than leg-spin bowlers.

“Off-spinners can still take wickets lbw with a ball pitched outside the line of - the wickets when a batsman does not play a shot, something that is denied the leg-spinner when he pitches a ball on the leg side,” said Mr Guillen. The meeting spent considerable time discussing hypothetical arguments as to how the rule should be interpreted for different situations. The danger of an inexperienced umpire having to judge what was a genuine shot was raised by Mr Guillen.

He asked if a shot would be considered genuine when a skilled batsman drew his bat away at the last minute when a ball moved off the wickeit and also in the case of a

“googly” delivery when the batsman positioned himself for a cut expecting the' ball to spin away only to. find it come back on him. The general feeling of-the meeting was that umpires’ own personal opinions would have to cover such situations. Mr O. Hutchinson, of the Old Collegians club, asked that greater efforts be made to educate players in all grades of the rules of cricket with particular emphasis 'on the lbw rule.