When are international umpires going to start calling no balls again?

The modern day trend of umpires turning a blind eye to no-balls can influence the outcome of a game. If Sharma had been rightly called for overstepping the line, it quite possibly could have destroyed his rhythm and run up for the rest of the innings. This, in turn, could have resulted in Sharma being removed from the attack or bowling poorly if Kohli persisted with him. Happened to Brett Lee in a Sydney test several years ago. It is also a distinct disadvantage if the bowler is allowed to believe his deliveries are legal, as a result of umpire inaction. To have a wicket taken off a fielding team after a review, with no prior input from the umpire, seems an injustice.

Your conclusion is what's already happening! As for non strikers 'warning' umpires, there's already a massive erosion of the basic tenet of the game; "the umpires decision is final." The second guessing of umpires with interminable TV replays and now player reviews has eroded respect for umpiring enough, without allowing non strikers to tell an umpire he isn't umpiring properly. The implications in grass roots cricket is scary to think of, especially with some competitions having opposition players doing umpiring duties. The simple answer is for existing umpires to return to the well worn process.

Standing a metre back from the stumps can give you perspective of the height on LBW appeals that standing right over the bails doesn’t necessarily give you depending on your own height and eye line. However experience gives you judgement regardless of how far behind the stumps you stand. Umpires need to adapt, just as players do. If an umpire is asked to stand back so a spinner can go between them and the stumps, or as in my case I wanted to get a stump to stump line, so wanted to be as close to the stumps on delivery, then you need an umpire back so you don’t crash into them when gathering to deliver. While those bowler actions are within the rules the umpires will need to adapt when standing back and develop an eye for the front line. It’s a process and those at the elite level aren’t employing it.

The discussion isn't about stopping no balls; no bowler tries to bowl a no ball. The discussion is about the lack of process from umpires picking those no balls up. An umpire calling a bowler for chucking leads to remedial work, the same has happened for ever with bowlers who have a no ball problem. Adding more runs for no balls is moot, if the umpire isn't calling them in the first place.

Or the umpire look at the line and go with his gut, just like everyone who's ever umpired before. Hundred's of us don't have the benefit of technology and that's a gift, because we go through the process and as I was taught in my teens; nine times out of ten the first thing that comes to your mind is correct. Then elite professional umpires have the benefit of hindsight via technology. That doesn't excuse not using a well worn process. If it's a concentration problem (unsure why when they're standing for the same length of time as they have for decades) then rotate the 3 umpires through the sessions on ground and in the booth.

Imagine the difference the scoreline would read if umpires called Ishant’s 16 no balls? Would it have been 16? Kohli surely woulda lost faith in him before that and taken him from the attack. Then you see a different complexion on the game, batsmen taking advantage of a bowler with no rhythm, or a part timer bowling in his place. Sixteen runs and additional scoring opportunities in a game decided by less than twice those no balls. That shows the importance of Umpires concentrating rather than relying on technology to fix a dismissal. These guys are supposed to be amongst the elite dozen chosen for international duty and they can’t even go through a process that’s been pivotal to umpiring at every level for decades. It has to have sanction, at least amongst the umpiring fraternity, otherwise it wouldn’t be as endemic as it is, but it must be addressed immediately. If those no balls were called, Ishant’s place in Perth had to be under massive scrutiny and the selectors then have issues. His Perth 4fa then is seen in a different light. Would he have played? Couple this issue with the recent West Indies dismissal from a no ball, where the umpires couldn’t even count fielders correctly and the umpires need a massive refresher.

A cricket umpire not calling no-balls is like an AFL umpire not paying marks. It's fundamental to the game. Even worse that my AFL analogy is that it's fundamental to the fairness of the game; the purpose of the umpire is to make sure a game is played without either team gaining an unfair advantage. By allowing bowlers to release the ball closer to the stumps that what is designated for both teams (ie. the popping crease) then the bowler is gaining an unfair advantage. We don't need technology to help us here - umpires have been calling no-balls for over a century. I don't understand why they're not doing their jobs, but this should be rectified immediately or the offending umpire stood down permanently.

Nice article Chris. Uncalled no-balls tend to disadvantage both the batting and bowling team, by costing the batting side runs they deserve and increasing the risk of bowlers overstepping when they take a wicket. Whether it's by getting the third umpire check or by having the on-field umpires pay more attention, it should be an easy fix. One thing worth considering is whether on-field umpires have become more gun-shy after Richard Illingworth incorrectly called Doug Bracewell for a no-ball when he dismissed Adam Voges back in 2016. There'd surely be a few who are nervous of a repeat incident.

That's 16 runs to the total which is also 16 balls that could have been scored off or taken wickets! At the very least the game is much tighter, although India did deserve the win. I didn't realise it had become endemic, needs to be addressed.

Same Roger. And I believe the right process...

He should have been censured after that extremely poor call. It gifted the game to Australia. Forever is probably a bit tough but it made my blood boil at the time. Worthy meme over here tho...

Like everything in cricket when the BCCI tells them.

I've even been tipped by a few umpires that I was getting close to being no-balled. We haven't seen anything like that for a while.

Nigel Llong should be marked as a sub-par umpire forever for his "it could be anything" decision that reprieved Nathan Lyon during the day-night test back in 2015 Anything except a cricket ball hitting the bat apparently

I think fielding sides aren't concerned with it until it costs a wicket. Batting sides might feel more aggrieved missing early calls and a free hit. One solution might be for the non-striker to keep an eye and give the umpire a friendly warning - I'm sure the canny batsmen already do. But maybe the edict to not enforce real-time calling of no-balls by the on-field umpires is a way the authorities can tell coaches, captains and most of all the bowlers they can jolly well police themselves and if you don't address it yourself, you will get stung when a wicket is taken and replays conclude it was an illegal delivery.

Love a bit of fake news on this website. to respond 1. Finch chose not to review. His fault, not the umpire. If the ball brushed his glove or otherwise - he surely would know. 2. What silly face? 3. Any proof of Dharmasena being gutless to give Indians out? Or is Llong a sub-par umpire for his decisions being overturned for being wrong? In fact, all 10 of the Indian dismissals in the second innings were caught. Finding it hard to see how Dharmasena was gutless.

The free hit suggestion is a sensible compromise I reckon.

I like the idea of the no-ball call being made after the delivery is completed. At least that way they'd get it right. This notion a batsman should be able to adapt or change their shot on the fly is just an entitlement and a furphy anyway, as you say.