- The ball must pitch on the line of at least leg stump, and
- Be still hitting the wickets
- The ball is very full, and/or
- There is significant movement back in
I was still dirty about it the following day, so I thought I would do some analysis. Were my beliefs flawed?
I want to start by saying that the umpire:
- Only has a split second to consider a number of factors
- Only rarely has to consider height a factor on Wellington pitches, albeit many balls did bounce over the stumps on this deck.
- May have a different view of my underlying assumptions.
I started with basic assumptions about the pitch; dimensions from the graphic below which came from Wikipedia.
I also noted from this article that:
- The wicket is 23cm wide
- The stumps protrude to 71.1cm above the ground
- For across the pitch, stated impact was in front of middle and off. I reckoned this to be 1/3rd of the way from the edge of off stump, i.e. 7.67cm from the edge of off stump
- Up the pitch is a little harder to estimate. I take guard with my back foot usually 30-50cm in front of the crease, putting my front foot about 1 metre out from the crease. I was hit on the front pad of my front foot. While I was certainly not playing the ball on the back foot, I hardly got a stride in either. I've used 1 metre from the crease for my calculations, and I think that is a fair estimate.
I used FreeCad to create the above diagram; the files I made are downloable here. To explain:
- The Red box is the 'vitrual mat' which goes between both sets of stumps.
- The Blue box is the distance from the point of impact to the popping crease
- The Black lines indicate the range a ball could have been delivered from, hit the impact point and gone on to hit the stumps
OK, so how about the pitching in line with leg stump? First, some more observations:
- As mentioned previously, I was hit adjacent to my knee. The measured height of this is 54cm.
- Given this height, it is safe to conclude that this was not what is generally regarded as a Full Length Ball, i.e. within 4m of the batsman. It is more reasonable to conclude that it was a Good Length Ball, bouncing between 4-7m from the batman.
However, the height causes other issues:
- If the ball was fuller, the implication is that it has gained height quickly (and will therefore continue to do so). Given impact 54cm up, the top of the 71.1cm of the stumps could easily be missed.
- If the ball was shorter, meaning height would not be such an issue for LBW, this then narrows our possible delivery point.
Investigating that second point further, if the ball had pitched on leg stump at the end of the Good length, i.e. 7m from the batsman, it would have:
- had to have been bowled from not more than 11.2cm outside of leg stump to still go through the impact point.
- hits the wickets 2.81cm from the outside edge of off stump
In conclusion, it is possible to be correctly adjudged LBW to a:
- non deviating,
- good length ball
- from a left arm bowler
- even if you are hit on the front pad well down the wicket
7 comments:
Jebus. I look forward to seeing a post on how it's possible that Aaron could manage to miss a goal by kicking it over the bar from 2 yards out and the ball still manage to end up in row Z.
How on earth could I be ridiculed through this post - its as if you instantly connect me to LBWs - scandalous.
G-Mann, there is only one thing to say to this - FINE! This is crazy. But it sounds like an inglorious end to a glorious cricketing career - why are you pulling stumps? Don't worry - the boring season is over, now its time for the real thing.
This analysis is totally over the top, I know that. Especially since the umpire has subsequently told me that the ball did swing in to me.
Also while it is true that this is my last game, I do have a shot at redemption this Saturday; it is a 2 day game and this was the first innings
However I have to say I enjoyed doing this analysis; I've been a bit inspired by Nate Silver's updated fivethirtyeight, which takes a very rigorous approach to statistics (who knew a Steal in Basketball is actually worth 9.1 points?
So what's up with calling it quits though? You'd be the last original Stallion (i.e. Was in the team when it became the Stallions) in that team would you not?
For me it is the time commitment; I'll still play 20/20 as it is basically the same time commitment as football.
Along with Greg, whose last game was a couple before mine, we would be the last original Stallions. Honourable mention to inaugural Stallions captain Michael Butchard, who kept play at least on a part time basis until his move down South last year.
Post a Comment