Decade-wise distribution of dismissals (test cricket only)

[Gollum]

 

 

 

 

Quote

The initial law until 1937 was that both pitch and impact had to be in line with the stumps and go on to be hitting. The law then changed to similar to today’s in that the ball could pitch outside off stump, but impact had to be in line. Then in 1970 it changed slightly, so that it could impact outside off stump as long as a shot wasn’t played. Finally we have DRS introduced initially in 2009 which didn’t change the law, but instead made it reviewable

 

Shamelessly borrowing from reddit/Cricket. Haven't checked myself but from the discussion there, data seems legit. So assuming this is true, what explains this?

 

One would assume LBW form of dismissal is more in vogue post-DRS, have often heard commentators/players saying how umpires are less hesitant to give LBWs these days. So what are your thoughts? Theories?

Edited February 22, 2023 by Gollum

[Vijy]

1 minute ago, Gollum said:

 

 

Shamelessly borrowing from reddit/Cricket. Haven't checked myself but from the discussion there, data seems legit. So assuming this is true, what explains this?

 

One would assume LBW form of dismissal is more in vogue post-DRS, have often heard commentators/players saying how umpires are less hesitant to give LBWs these days. So what are your thoughts? Theories?

it is DRS plus more bowling-centric pitches plus batters' tendency to just plonk foot and get trapped in front

[Gollum]

3 minutes ago, Vijy said:

it is DRS plus more bowling-centric pitches plus batters' tendency to just plonk foot and get trapped in front

If the data is accurate, LBW mode of dismissal hasn't shot up (noticeably) post introduction of DRS. That's what this thread is about.

 

 

Edited February 22, 2023 by Gollum

[Vijy]

8 minutes ago, Gollum said:

If the data is accurate, LBW mode of dismissal hasn't shot up (noticeably) post introduction of DRS. That's what this thread is about.

 

 

yes, what I meant is that some of these factors are cancelling each other out. for instance, I suspect that DRS has actually aided in overturning a major subset of LBW dismissals.

[zen]

DRS can impact how a batsman plays his game. For e.g. fearing LBWs, he may restrict some shots or attempt an unusual shot, which could lead to a different mode of dismissal. 

 

Talking about the graphs, if you look at the point where DRS is introduced, there is actually a slight dip. Post DRS, the curve is say attempting to change the downward trend (while also making balls pitched outside leg a non issue unless you lose all your reviews). The "bowled" has increased too, hinting at potential issues with footwork/positioning out of fear for LBWs. 

 

Hope this helps! 

Edited February 22, 2023 by zen

[zen]

Maybe get rid of umpire's call. It is in use because of certain limitations in tech, but time to display more confidence in the tech, if it is hitting the stumps, it's out (even if the umpire gave it not out, where umpire's call = not out). 

Edited February 22, 2023 by zen

[Tillu]

On the same Reddit thread, it was noted that more LHBs are getting out on LBW post DRS.

[Gollum]

On 2/22/2023 at 8:24 AM, Vijy said:

yes, what I meant is that some of these factors are cancelling each other out. for instance, I suspect that DRS has actually aided in overturning a major subset of LBW dismissals.

Yeah especially the ones with impact outside off, pitching outside leg, most edges (the one Kohli got in Delhi, DRS with available tech still can't conclusively come to the correct decision). Ball tracking and umpire's call, still contentious though, but many howlers too have been eliminated. 

Edited February 23, 2023 by Gollum

[Gollum]

On 2/22/2023 at 8:42 AM, zen said:

DRS can impact how a batsman plays his game. For e.g. fearing LBWs, he may restrict some shots or attempt an unusual shot, which could lead to a different mode of dismissal. 

 

Talking about the graphs, if you look at the point where DRS is introduced, there is actually a slight dip. Post DRS, the curve is say attempting to change the downward trend (while also making balls pitched outside leg a non issue unless you lose all your reviews). The "bowled" has increased too, hinting at potential issues with footwork/positioning out of fear for LBWs. 

 

Hope this helps! 

Great point, it sure does mess with the heads of batsmen. Now they are forced to show more bat, bringing bat-pad dismissals into play. Earlier batsmen were more confident about keeping bat hidden behind pad or offering no shot. 

 

Maybe we must investigate if bat-pads have increased since introduction of DRS. Bowlers like Lyon and Moeen give more overspin to the ball (more bounce than sidespin), hence harvesting many bat pads against our batsmen, that's the feeling I get. Maybe our past batsmen were more well protected against this mode of dismissal. 

[Gollum]

Often heard commentators (including non-Indian ones) say how LBWs have increased in frequency post-DRS. That's why this thread. I think LBWs as a percentage of total dismissals has been more or less constant but maybe fear of LBWs has led to other modes of dismissal.

 

@R!TTER the numbers surprise you?

[maniac]

On 2/21/2023 at 11:27 PM, zen said:

Maybe get rid of umpire's call. It is in use because of certain limitations in tech, 

based on the limitations only they would rather err on the right side in this case which is the umpire whose word is final. You need to give enough respect to the human umpire who is a professional when you don’t trust technology enough. It doesn’t matter the decision goes against or in favor of your fav team/player it’s the same for all.

 

Technology decision should override humans only when there is 100% accuracy. Until then we have to go with the assumption that the trained human professional is excellent at his job or else replaced with a better professional.

 

I do agree the day you have 100% accuracy it should take over. I like the front foot monitoring has been automated now and eliminates the oversight.

 

 

Edited February 23, 2023 by maniac

[zen]

8 minutes ago, maniac said:

based on the limitations only they would rather err on the right side in this case which is the umpire whose word is final. You need to give enough respect to the human umpire who is a professional when you don’t trust technology enough. It doesn’t matter the decision goes against or in favor of your fav team/player it’s the same for all.

 

Technology decision should override humans only when there is 100% accuracy. Until then we have to go with the assumption that the trained human professional is excellent at his job or else replaced with a better professional.

 

I do agree the day you have 100% accuracy it should take over. I like the front foot monitoring has been automated now and eliminates the oversight.

 

 

At the end of the day, the tech is speculating too based on parameters programmed into it (if those parameters are changed, one could get different results). If it goes to the 3rd umpire, it implies that the decision by the human umpire is questioned.  Therefore, 100% decision should be based on technology. If the tech shows, hitting the stumps, it should be out. If uncertainty in certain areas due to the tech is to be factored in, then the benefit of doubt can go the batsman. No umpire's call, as I said, if it does to 3rd umpire, it is in tech's domain. 

[vvvslaxman]

11 hours ago, Gollum said:

Great point, it sure does mess with the heads of batsmen. Now they are forced to show more bat, bringing bat-pad dismissals into play. Earlier batsmen were more confident about keeping bat hidden behind pad or offering no shot. 

 

Maybe we must investigate if bat-pads have increased since introduction of DRS. Bowlers like Lyon and Moeen give more overspin to the ball (more bounce than sidespin), hence harvesting many bat pads against our batsmen, that's the feeling I get. Maybe our past batsmen were more well protected against this mode of dismissal. 

 

Sehwag regardlless of the era only used bat. Even in this DRS era i back Sehwag to torment spinners. In DRS era some batsmen like Tendulkar would have benefitted though. He had quiet a few bad decisions in the 90s against him.. We probably would have won the bucknor series.

[R!TTER]

He also had the paddle sweep, easily the best player of that shot I've seen! The biggest issue with SRT was his reach, reach has a lot of advantages in cricket especially agasint spin.

16 minutes ago, vvvslaxman said:

He had quiet a few bad decisions in the 90s against him

Not just him, in general we had to suffer a lot of howlers regularly! In par because our bowling was sh!t for 60 years, when the opposition bowlers are creating more chances they will also get more (howlers) in their favor. It's just a fact.

[vvvslaxman]

16 minutes ago, R!TTER said:

He also had the paddle sweep, easily the best player of that shot I've seen! The biggest issue with SRT was his reach, reach has a lot of advantages in cricket especially agasint spin.

Not just him, in general we had to suffer a lot of howlers regularly! In par because our bowling was sh!t for 60 years, when the opposition bowlers are creating more chances they will also get more (howlers) in their favor. It's just a fact.

 

Pakistan and Australian umpiring were extremely biased.  England was the decent one. Windies out of fear were very biased. So many noballs were allowed to bowl. Those tall guys overstepping frequently was able to intimidate the opposition. There was this srilankan umpire BC COoray gave three lbws against India of the bowling of Aquib javed. Every one was dodgy.

[cowboysfan]

i am surprised about the LBWs to be honest.with DRS i would assume LBWs will be way up.i would like to see some data  on LBWs post DRS in the subcontinent.

[BacktoCricaddict]

15 hours ago, cowboysfan said:

i am surprised about the LBWs to be honest.with DRS i would assume LBWs will be way up.i would like to see some data  on LBWs post DRS in the subcontinent.

 

Overall, these are good data but somewhat incomplete, and may never be complete because you cannot account for behavioral changes in umpires once DRS-assistance is available.  Do they give a higher rate of LBWs, but DRS overturned a lot of them, so the numbers fell back?  Or did they not give as many and DRS overturned them bringing the number back?  Our hypothesis that the rate of LBWs would have increased is based on the assumption that umpires give the same number as before, teams challenge more and DRS rules in favor of the fielding team at a higher rate than before. 

 

I am curious why the rate of LBWs went up and rate of bowleds went down from 70s to 90s?

 

  

[vvvslaxman]

15 hours ago, cowboysfan said:

i am surprised about the LBWs to be honest.with DRS i would assume LBWs will be way up.i would like to see some data  on LBWs post DRS in the subcontinent.

 

Batsmen consciously avoid being hit on the pads. Rohit did it in the first test by moving his back leg outside the line of leg stump.

[vvvslaxman]

It also comes down to type of bowlers they are

 

Kumble  619 wickets  15% of his wickets bowled  25% of his wickets leg before

Bhajji      417 wickets  11 % of his wickets bowled 16% of his wickets leg before

Ashwin  463 wickets   20% of his wickets bowled   22% of his wickets leg before

Jadeja    259 wickets   23% of his wickets bowled   21% of his wickets beg before

 

Even factoring DRS Kumble has higher percentage of leg befores than these guys.  There is a case that batsmen keep the pads away these days a lot more than before where they get infront.  Only when we have data on how many leg befores were over turned one way or the other we can't conclude anything.   

[zen]

On 2/23/2023 at 3:02 AM, Gollum said:

Great point, it sure does mess with the heads of batsmen. Now they are forced to show more bat, bringing bat-pad dismissals into play. Earlier batsmen were more confident about keeping bat hidden behind pad or offering no shot. 

 

Maybe we must investigate if bat-pads have increased since introduction of DRS. Bowlers like Lyon and Moeen give more overspin to the ball (more bounce than sidespin), hence harvesting many bat pads against our batsmen, that's the feeling I get. Maybe our past batsmen were more well protected against this mode of dismissal. 

 

Did not see the below but could be an example:

 

Steven Smith (c)	c †Bharat b Jadeja	26	38	4	0	68.42
48.5 got him! That's a massive wicket. Denied in the previous over, but gets him this time. This one explodes off the pitch as Smith lunges forward, the ball deviates big and kisses the edge as Bharat takes an excellent catch. 146/4