Cricket Umpires Research Articles

That’s out! How expert umpires make leg-before-wicket judgements in cricket

ABSTRACT Despite evidence that elite-level cricket umpires are highly accurate in making leg-before-wicket (LBW) judgements, there is limited understanding as to how they make these judgements. In this study, we explored the explicit LBW decision-making expertise of elite-level cricket umpires (N = 10) via 10 individual semi-structured interviews. Using thematic analysis, we aimed to identify the sources of information that umpires incorporate into their decision-making process. Results indicated that umpires engage in intentional pre-delivery information-gathering to guide their expectations, and to set context-specific parameters as to what would constitute an LBW dismissal. Not only do umpires use information about the ball trajectory, but they also use additional information about the condition of the pitch, the action-capabilities and susceptibilities of players, and the unique requirements of different match formats. Umpires reported employing a gaze-anchor strategy when gathering information for each delivery and described the process of this information as initially intuitive, before engaging in deeper post-hoc reasoning. Findings highlight the importance of including contextual information when exploring officials’ decisions and may inform future training interventions for cricket umpires.

Home advantage and LBW decisions: The contribution of umpiring to the home-ground (dis)advantage in cricket

ObjectivesThis study aimed to determine whether elite cricket umpires' decisions contribute to home advantage via leg-before-wicket decisions. DesignLeg-before-wicket decisions (n = 4971) from actual elite level cricket matches in Australia between 2009 and 2016 were analysed using a binomial logistic regression to predict the umpires' leg-before-wicket decisions. MethodsRegressions were performed to determine whether the batter's team (home or away) influenced the likelihood that the umpire would give them out leg-before-wicket. ResultsWe found no evidence of home advantage in umpires' leg-before-wicket decisions. In fact, we found evidence that umpires in some instances disadvantage the home team. ConclusionsWe suggest that the increased professionalism of sports officials, and the scrutiny they are placed under, may lead umpires to reduce or even overcompensate for any existing biases in their decision making.

No expectation bias in elite-level cricket umpires’ leg-before-wicket (LBW) decisions according to batting order position

ObjectivesPrevious studies have shown that sport officials’ decisions can be impacted by biases associated with expectations. The aim of this study was to determine whether elite cricket umpires’ decisions are also influenced by expectations associated with batter skill. MethodsLBW decisions (n = 5578) from actual elite level cricket matches in Australia between 2009 and 2016 were analysed in a multi-level binomial logistic regression paradigm. In our first model, we predicted the likelihood that an umpire will answer ‘out’ for batters in the top order (1–4), middle order (5–7), and low order (8-11). In our second model, we controlled for the correctness of a decision. ResultsUmpires were more likely to respond ‘out’ as the batting order progressed, however this did not appear to be due to biased decision-making. Instead, as batting order progressed, batters were more likely to actually be ‘out’. ConclusionsCricket umpires do not seem to be impacted by expectation bias associated with batting order. This study highlights the importance of controlling for the correctness of a decision when exploring bias in sport officials’ decisions.

Howzat! Expert umpires use a gaze anchor to overcome the processing demands of leg before wicket decisions

ABSTRACT Cricket umpires are required to make high-pressure, match-changing decisions based on multiple complex information sources under severe temporal constraints. The aim of this study was to examine the decision-making and perceptual-cognitive differences between expert and novice cricket umpires when judging leg before wicket (LBW) decisions. Twelve expert umpires and 19 novice umpires were fitted with an eye-tracker before viewing video-based LBW appeals. Dependent variables were radial error (cm), number of fixations, average fixation duration (ms), final fixation duration (ms), and final fixation location (%). Expert umpires were significantly more accurate at adjudicating on all aspects of the LBW law, compared to the novice umpires (p < .05). The expert umpires’ final fixation prior to ball-pad contact was directed significantly more towards the stumps (p < .05), whereas the novice umpires directed their final fixation significantly more towards a good length (p < .05). These data suggest that expert umpires utilize specialized perceptual-cognitive skills, consisting of a gaze anchor on the stumps in order to overcome the processing demands of the task. These data have implications for the training of current and aspiring umpires in order to enhance the accuracy of LBW decision-making across all levels of the cricketing pyramid.

Is the pink ball still under review? Cricket umpires’ perceptions of the pink ball for day/night matches

ObjectivesThe visibility of the pink ball used in day/night Test cricket has been under scrutiny, with recent research suggesting cricketers find the pink ball less visible at dusk under floodlights. With increasing interest in this match format, this study sought to investigate elite umpires’ opinions pertaining to the visibility of the pink cricket ball during day/night matches. DesignPurposeful sampling of a cross-section of elite umpires with experience adjudicating matches played using a pink cricket ball. MethodsTwenty-seven international/first-class umpires completed a questionnaire consisting of Likert scale and free text responses covering perceptions of the pink cricket ball, with a particular emphasis on visibility. ResultsThe pink ball when viewed at night under floodlights was rated as being significantly more visible than the red ball during natural lighting (ps<0.050). Umpires who actively participated in training reported a significantly higher rating of the visibility of the pink ball (mean −3.14) at night under floodlights compared to those who didn’t (mean p=0.010). No significant difference was reported in visibility in natural light or dusk under floodlights. Free text responses (n=10) revealed the following themes: use of eyewear (coverage 0.30), and adjustment to positioning (coverage 0.20) to improve visibility of the pink ball. ConclusionsUmpires report the visibility of the pink ball is equal to the red in natural light and at dusk but is significantly better at night. Preference for the pink ball is likely due to the predominantly perceptual nature of visual tasks performed by umpires.

When in doubt, it’s not out: Match format is associated with differences in elite-level cricket umpires’ leg-before-wicket decisions

ObjectivesContextual factors can influence the way sports officials apply unambiguous rules. The aim of this study was to better understand the leg-before-wicket (LBW) decision-making behaviour of elite cricket umpires and determine whether their behaviour changes according to the format of the game in which they are adjudicating. MethodsLBW decisions (n = 5578) from actual elite level cricket matches in Australia between 2009 and 2016 were analysed using a signal detection paradigm. Umpire sensitivity (A) and response bias (B) were compared to chance performance in three formats of the game: Four-day, One-day, and T20. Mixed effects models assessed sensitivity and response bias differences between match types. ResultsUmpires were able to differentiate between “out” and “not out” appeals to a high standard but were conservative and had a bias to respond “not out” in all formats of the game. Umpires were less accurate in the shorter formats of the game, particularly T20 cricket and were also significantly more conservative in T20 compared to Four-day Matches. ConclusionsCricket umpires are conservative and are highly accurate LBW decision makers. However, differences in their judgments were associated with different match formats. The unique task goals and contextual pressures afforded by the shorter formats of the game, particularly T20, may account for the observed performance differences we see here.

The Use of Geophysics as an Aid for Cricket Umpires

A particularly difficult part of cricket umpiring is judging whether the batsman has ‘nicked’ the ball on its way from the bowler to wicket keeper. If they have then the batsman is dismissed, if not, or if the batsman has hit his pad rather than the ball, then the batsmen remains in. Even with modern high-speed cameras discerning a nick by eye is virtually impossible so during international cricket matches the umpire is aided in their decision making by an audio recording. This can be inconclusive, however, if there is considerable other noise being made (usually by the crowd), and especially if there is the possibility that the batsman may have hit the ground or another part of his body or equipment. To a geophysicist the solution to this problem is obvious, attach three component vibration sensors to the bat, record the data, and then look for any impacts, and this is in-effect what we have done. The results are convincing, not only can we detect impacts but also the type of impact and even the position of the bat upon which the impact occurred. Not only is the data superior to audio recordings but can be obtained more easily and cheaply making its application to the lower levels of cricket possible.

The effect of three different visual monitoring strategies on the accuracy of leg‐before‐wicket decisions by cricket umpires

Background: Leg‐before‐wicket (LBW) dismissals in cricket require exacting visual judgements by umpires, a task complicated by the requirement to also adjudicate on where the bowler's front foot is relative to the popping crease line about the time the ball leaves the bowler's hand. The umpire must then judge as soon as possible afterwards whether the direction of the flight of the ball is in line with the batsman's stumps. This study investigated whether the accuracy of cricket umpires' decision‐making in leg‐before‐wicket dismissals is affected by varying the method by which umpires monitor bowlers' feet at the point of delivery of the ball.Methods: Four umpires officiating under simulated match conditions reported their judgements of whether each delivery they observed pitched in line with the stumps. They did so under one of three conditions: watching the bowler's front foot, watching the bowler's back foot prior to the delivery of the ball by the bowler or not monitoring the bowler's feet (‘no foot’ condition). Video recording, assisted by the use of superimposed stump‐to‐stump lines, was used to assess the accuracy of the umpires' responses.Results: There was no statistically significant difference in umpires' performance when comparing the front foot condition to the back foot condition but performance for the ‘no foot’ condition was significantly better than for the front foot condition.Conclusions: These results suggest that umpires' performance judging LBW dismissals would be improved if they did not have to monitor bowlers' feet to adjudicate ‘no‐ball’ deliveries but there would be no benefit from a reversion from the current ‘front foot’ no‐ball law to the previously used back foot law.

Why it is difficult to detect an illegally bowled cricket delivery with either the naked eye or usual two-dimensional video analysis

ObjectiveIn this study, the influence of various anatomical and biomechanical factors on the ability to detect the magnitude of elbow extension during the cricket bowling action, with either the naked...

Visual perception of action categories and the “bowl-throw” decision in cricket

Cricket umpires, cricket bowlers, and physical education students (who were knowledgeable about the rules of cricket), were shown 72 videotaped point-light displays of cricket deliveries with varying extents of elbow flexion such that they ranged from highly "bowl-like" to highly "throw-like". The observers made a bowl-throw decision about each display, and the umpires and bowlers reported their confidence on a 5-point scale. The percentage of displays reported as a "bowl" was 59, 40, and 44 for the umpires, bowlers, and students respectively. Umpires made significantly more bowl decisions than both the bowlers and students, but there was no difference between the latter groups. Umpires were significantly more confident than the bowlers in both their bowl and throw decisions. Thus, in an experimental setting, with no apparent costs or benefits associated with their decision-making, umpires "called" a bowler significantly less frequently for throwing than other knowledgeable observers. The procedures devised for this experiment demonstrate that psychophysical methods can be applied to the problem of discrete action-category nominations in sport (e.g., bowl or throw, walk or run).

A Commentary on Wright MB (1991): Scheduling English Cricket Umpires

A Commentary on Wright MB (1991): Scheduling English Cricket Umpires

A commentary on Wright MB (1991): Scheduling English cricket umpires

A commentary on Wright MB (1991): Scheduling English cricket umpires

Scheduling English Cricket Umpires

Scheduling English Cricket Umpires

Scheduling English Cricket Umpires

This paper concerns a computer system which was devised to schedule umpires for the major cricket games played in England. The context of the work is discussed briefly, and the many constraints and objectives are described. An outline of the solution method, rather than exact details of the algorithms used, is given. In addition, two technical points concerning the exact formulation of the objective function are discussed, since they are probably relevant to many other applications. The results are described briefly.

Scheduling English Cricket Umpires

A substantial amount of professional cricket is played in England. Apart from ‘Test matches’ (major international matches), this mostly consists of the ‘first-class’ county elevens, of whom there are currently 17, playing against each other in various competitions, though there are also important matches involving touring teams, university teams and others.