Offering the light?

[Kev]

I was tempted to stick this in the English domestic thread, but I think point 4 of the following merits some discussion on its own.

Full Article

http://www.ecb.co.uk/news/media-releases/ecb-sanction-four-changes,15729,EN.html

4. Fitness of conditions
It was recommended and approved that Level 2 of the fitness of conditions regulations – as stated by current Law and ECB playing conditions - be removed.
Current Law and ECB playing conditions state that there are essentially three levels of fitness of ground, weather and light.
The umpire must consider at all times into which level the conditions fall:
Level 1 – Suitable – perfectly acceptable
Level 2 – Unsuitable – not ideal for play but not actually dangerous.
Level 3 – Unreasonable or dangerous – any reasonable person could foresee the likelihood of injury to those on the field of play. Umpires will not allow play to take place. Captains have no say.

 

[Skater]

Not sure, maybe it will make umpires think about it until it's really dark. Nothing will be solved until they get rid of those frigging digital light meters!!!!

 

[usy]

digital light meters are kool, they should make more use of it.

 

[Skater]

digital light meters are kool, they should make more use of it.

God no. There is no better judge than the human eye.

 

[Kev]

I honestly can't remember if the umpire use lightmeters in County cricket, From memory they just seem to appear from their little room, have a little look to the heavens, totter off to the square, have a natter with the groundsman then trott off back for another cuppa.

But thats not the point. The point is by removing the second condition, the umpires will no longer "offer the light" to the batsmen. Is this better? Would it work on the international stage?

 

[Almost_Austwick]

Not much is going to change, they're just removing a pretty pointless clause in order to tidy things up.

If they stop offering the light to the batsman then we lose that element of the game but I doubt that much will change, if anything they'll play it extra cautious rather than have batsman playing in near darkness.

It's either fit to play or it's not, end of.

 

[usy]

I think batsman should defo have the advantage of "offer" from the umpire, so yes. Rather then Umpires acting like fake bosses.

 

[FreddieFan]

Not sure, maybe it will make umpires think about it until it's really dark. Nothing will be solved until they get rid of those frigging digital light meters!!!!

Persoanlly I am very much in favour of light meters. When the light is offered to a team, a reading is taken at that level and it becomes the standard level at which light is offered for the rest of the match. The human eye may well be the best tool in determining the suitability of light to play in at any given time, but how are umpires supposed to compare the current light level with one that was offered 4 days previously?

It provides consistency, which I think is vitally important to good umpiring. Persoanlly, I am not too bothered about an Umpire's take on how much sledging/intimidory bowling etc is allowable, as long as he is consistent in the application of his views, and things are fair for both teams. I also think both umpires should discuss any problems in the game (bowling too many bouncers etc) and agree their response to it, which should be the same, otherwise captains will bowl a bowler from 1 end just because they'll get away with it there.

Onto the topic of the rules, I am far from convinced by the reccomendation. I suspect the point at which they put the border between the two levels will be the important factor, it'll be a disaster if tests can suddenly only be played in really good light because Test matches will never get finished.

 

[Sureshot]

Bad light is a big problem in Cricket, take the Sri Lanka tour for instance, bad light can sometimes be unavoidable, but the sun always sets! And you know what time it will affect the light too, I have no idea why a 4:30 (10Am SL time) start wasn't the official start time.

Can someone remind me of what has happened with the use of floodlights in bad light, I seem to remember it being used, in Australia iirc, I remember one of the Aussie lads posting about it.

 

[Kev]

Can someone remind me of what has happened with the use of floodlights in bad light, I seem to remember it being used, in Australia iirc, I remember one of the Aussie lads posting about it.

Certainly in CCh its been discontinued. Didn't work.

 

[ivanvdm15]

they should throw the ball quickly at the Umpires face and ask him can you see it?

 

[cricketmad09]

whats wrong with floodlights?

 

[ivanvdm15]

yeah seriously why can they play ODI's with the lights but test matches they can't?

 

[ZoraxDoom]

Test matches weren't made to be played under lights.

I like the light meters for the same reason as FF said, consistency. Ofcourse, I find the human eye a better tool, but sometimes the meter is best.

Offering the light to the batsmen would allow the bats to choose if they want to play on or leave. If it were the fifth day of the match, with 20 runs to get to win, I sure wouldn't want to go off for bad light. I'd like to keep batting and go for the win. Taking away this option from the batsmen, bad move in my opinion.

 

[SciD]

yeah seriously why can they play ODI's with the lights but test matches they can't?

If you have played cricket in light with red ball you will know before posting