Neutral umpires and their impact on subcontinental teams

[Ultimate_Game]

I had heard a lot of stories about poor subcontinental umpiring and its impact so thought of looking at home records for India and Pakistan before and after the advent of neutral umpires and must say I found some interesting stats... Before neutral umpires (Jan 15 1877 - Oct 15 1989) Team Span Mat Won Lost Tied Draw W/L Pakistan 1955-1988 81 28 7 0 46 4.00 Team Span Mat Won Lost Tied Draw W/L India 1933-1988 145 31 35 1 78 0.88 Couple of amazing findings are that Pak had a W/L ratio of 4 at home!!! The other interesting finding was that India played an incredible 145 Tests at home till 1988! After neutral umpires (Oct 15 1989 - 15 Apr 2011) Team Span Mat Won Lost Tied Draw W/L Pakistan 1989-2010 80 32 19 0 29 1.68 Team Span Mat Won Lost Tied Draw W/L India 1990-2010 84 42 14 0 28 3.00 Post neutral umpires portray even more interesting findings. Paksitan's W/L ratio dropped from 4 to a middling 1.68. Now that's a steep decline considering the fact Pakistan had a "great" team in 90s. So what really happened? And as far as India's record is concerned, India's W/L ratio surged from a paltry .88 to 3!!! These figures show that if there was any dodgy umpiring before neutral umpires it certainly wasn't India who benefited. These stats provide a lot of credence to the claims of players like Steve Waugh who claimed in his autobiography that it was next to impossible to get Pakistani batsmen LBW. The stats such as Miandad getting LBW just 3-4 times at home always hinted at something fishy but surely W/L ratio of a team dropping from 4 to 1.68 has to be even more emphatic proof of biased home umpiring. No wonder Pakistan actually lost to Zim at home after neutral umpires while earlier Pak was nearly invincible. P.S. - I haven't included SL and B'desh in my analysis as most of the games these teams have played has been after the neutral umpires.

[Alchemist]

Good work ultimate game :two_thumbs_up:

[Ultimate_Game]

Good work ultimate game :two_thumbs_up:

:bow: Now we finally know it wasn't the "great" Paki team of 80s and 90s who were responsible for such a stellar record but "great home umpiring" which made the difference. And the sad part is they gave India a bad name as well coz in those days English/Aussies used to club India & Pakistan together.

[Raghav_12]

Good work man.. But, anyways this wasn't a secret. Biased umpiring from Pakistanis was one of the major catalyst which prompted world cricket to go for neutral umpires. There used to be a time when people will laugh at a bowler who would appeal for an LBW in Pakistan against Pakistani player.

[Hell Raiser]

Good work buddy...:two_thumbs_up: That means SHAKOOR RANA was the biggest match winner that Pak had before neutral umpires came.

[ganeshran]

I think a more effective way of checking this statistic would be to see a difference between the W/L ratio in games with home umpires and games with neutral umpires.

[Asim]

Like always you portrayed ONLY one side of picture very well but if you are able to see other side as well, the fact is: you still have to thank Pakistan and Imran Khan for this major twist in history of cricket because it was Pakistan not only pushed the cricketing world to implement Neutral umpiring but practically for the first time ever implemented neutral umpiring by calling umpires from India to officiate their home series...

[Ramzz]

Like always you portrayed ONLY one side of picture very well but if you are able to see other side as well' date=' the fact is: you still have to thank Pakistan and Imran Khan for this major twist in history of cricket because it was Pakistan not only pushed the cricketing world to implement Neutral umpiring but practically for the first time ever implemented neutral umpiring by calling umpires from India to officiate their home series...[/quote'] :hysterical::hysterical::hysterical::hysterical::hysterical::hysterical:

[Asim]

Neutral umpires They made their first appearance when a Pakistan captain invited two Indian umpires to stand in a Test against West Indies S Rajesh April 16, 2011 Cricket's first decisive step towards quelling the age-old accusations that had dogged home umpiring came on November 7, 1986, when Indian umpires VK Ramaswamy and Piloo Reporter stood in a Test against West Indies in Lahore. The move was masterminded by Imran Khan, who was sick of the carping after every series in Pakistan, and he furthered the idea by inviting John Hampshire and John Holder (both from England) for the home series against India in 1989-90. The ICC soon realised it was the way forward. One neutral umpire per Test was appointed on an experimental basis in 1992, and the system was adopted two years later. The natural progression to two neutrals was made in 2002, starting with India's tour of the West Indies. As a result, umpires became the most travelled members of the cricket community, and were no longer charged with partisanship. But the irony is this: home teams have fared better since the introduction of a neutral umpire, with a win-loss ratio of 1.57:1 compared to 1.43:1 before. http://www.espncricinfo.com/magazine/content/story/511175.html

[NareshK]

Good work by the OP. Shame on Pak cheats. :thumpdown:

[putrevus]

Imran like he has always overestimated himself and his team thought he could beat West Indies and show the world that he ad his team were really a great team but he had to fight tooth and nail just to draw that series. Look at Imran and Kapil dev bowling avgs in India which show even though he was more experienced and faster than Kapil his record is worse than Kapil dev in India. 28 for Imran and 22 for kapil. But that record changes so dramatically in Pakistan Imran's avg is 22 and Kapil dev's avg is 40.Two factors to consider home umpiring benefiting Imran more in getting wickets against Indian batsmen and Pakistan batsmen again getting benefited by home umpiring in denying Kapil dev his wickets. This all changed in 1989 in Tendulkar debut series when India played in Pakistan but this time under neutral umpiring and guess what the so called great Imran Khan's avg was 38 and Kapil Dev 's Avg was 31. No wonder Pakistan had better test record than India but now it is showing why Pakistan's home record was nothing to ride home about, it was due to Shakoor Ranas and Hyder Alis. Pakistanis who boost their superior ODI record against should look at this stats in neutral venues other than Sharjah is 19 wins each from 1985 till date. http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/stats/index.html?class=2;filter=advanced;host=1;host=15;host=16;host=17;host=2;host=23;host=25;host=26;host=29;host=3;host=30;host=4;host=46;host=5;host=8;host=9;opposition=7;orderby=won;team=6;template=results;type=team

[Raghav_12]

Neutral umpires They made their first appearance when a Pakistan captain invited two Indian umpires to stand in a Test against West Indies S Rajesh April 16, 2011 Cricket's first decisive step towards quelling the age-old accusations that had dogged home umpiring came on November 7, 1986, when Indian umpires VK Ramaswamy and Piloo Reporter stood in a Test against West Indies in Lahore. The move was masterminded by Imran Khan, who was sick of the carping after every series in Pakistan, and he furthered the idea by inviting John Hampshire and John Holder (both from England) for the home series against India in 1989-90. The ICC soon realised it was the way forward. One neutral umpire per Test was appointed on an experimental basis in 1992, and the system was adopted two years later. The natural progression to two neutrals was made in 2002, starting with India's tour of the West Indies. As a result, umpires became the most travelled members of the cricket community, and were no longer charged with partisanship. But the irony is this: home teams have fared better since the introduction of a neutral umpire, with a win-loss ratio of 1.57:1 compared to 1.43:1 before. http://www.espncricinfo.com/magazine/content/story/511175.html

If somebody has been corrupt all though his life and has very bad reputation. Now towards end of his career, after being veru much sick of his image, he appoints few auditor on himself and says now onwards these auditors will scrutinize everything. What do you think, That person should not be called corrupt? Should that act wash away all past sins?

[CSK Fan]

Neutral umpires They made their first appearance when a Pakistan captain invited two Indian umpires to stand in a Test against West Indies S Rajesh April 16, 2011 Cricket's first decisive step towards quelling the age-old accusations that had dogged home umpiring came on November 7, 1986, when Indian umpires VK Ramaswamy and Piloo Reporter stood in a Test against West Indies in Lahore. The move was masterminded by Imran Khan, who was sick of the carping after every series in Pakistan, and he furthered the idea by inviting John Hampshire and John Holder (both from England) for the home series against India in 1989-90. The ICC soon realised it was the way forward. One neutral umpire per Test was appointed on an experimental basis in 1992, and the system was adopted two years later. The natural progression to two neutrals was made in 2002, starting with India's tour of the West Indies. As a result, umpires became the most travelled members of the cricket community, and were no longer charged with partisanship. But the irony is this: home teams have fared better since the introduction of a neutral umpire, with a win-loss ratio of 1.57:1 compared to 1.43:1 before. http://www.espncricinfo.com/magazine/content/story/511175.html

Nau sau chuhe kha kar, billi haj ko challi

[Mamu]

Cricket's first decisive step towards quelling the age-old accusations that had dogged home umpiring came on November 7, 1986, when Indian umpires VK Ramaswamy and Piloo Reporter stood in a Test against West Indies in Lahore.

Jee Asim -- you made it sound like Imran invited -- Indian Umpires to officiate an India - Pak Series. I almost had my Eye-Balls pop out -- saying -- "WHEN?" :--D

The move was masterminded by Imran Khan, who was sick of the carping after every series in Pakistan, and he furthered the idea by inviting John Hampshire and John Holder (both from England) for the home series against India in 1989-90.

Actually the author Rajesh is putting it very nicely here. Honestly Imran noticed how disgusting the Paki Umpires were -- I mean it was not even funny. As well travelled as Imran was -- he was probably getting embarassed about Paki Umpires -- everywhere in the world. And then he realized he had a good enough team -- where he could compete even without the help of the umpires -- and he initiated this move. Either way he initiated the move and he should get credit for it. PS: All home countries had bad umpires --- but to a large extent Paki Umpires were -- out of the league probably along with the Sri Lankans.

The ICC soon realised it was the way forward. One neutral umpire per Test was appointed on an experimental basis in 1992, and the system was adopted two years later. The natural progression to two neutrals was made in 2002, starting with India's tour of the West Indies. As a result, umpires became the most travelled members of the cricket community, and were no longer charged with partisanship. But the irony is this: home teams have fared better since the introduction of a neutral umpire, with a win-loss ratio of 1.57:1 compared to 1.43:1 before.

http://www.espncricinfo.com/magazine/content/story/511175.html

[Asim]

Nau sau chuhe kha kar' date=' billi haj ko challi[/quote'] "Dair aaed Drust aaed"...

[Ultimate_Game]

Like always you portrayed ONLY one side of picture very well but if you are able to see other side as well' date=' the fact is: you still have to thank Pakistan and Imran Khan for this major twist in history of cricket because it was Pakistan not only pushed the cricketing world to implement Neutral umpiring but practically for the first time ever implemented neutral umpiring by calling umpires from India to officiate their home series...[/quote'] Imran did that because of the following two main reasons... 1. World cricket had stopped taking Pakistan tour seriously as everyone knew what went on. Refer Shakoor Rana incident and what Steve Waugh had to say about Pakistani umpiring in his autobiography. 2. Imran actually believed in his own hype believing that they were good enough without home umpiring. Guess what he was in for a rude shock. Essentially rest of the world was proven cricket regarding Pakistan's record due to home umpiring. And the funny thing is lot of Pakistanis say "so what! Everyone used to do that including India" but they conveniently ignore the actual picture that no other team benefited from home umpiring as much as Pakistan. India's record before and after the advent of neutral umpiring clearly reflects the conclusion.

[Mamu]

Imran did that because of the following two main reasons... 1. World cricket had stopped taking Pakistan tour seriously as everyone knew what went on. Refer Shakoor Rana incident and what Steve Waugh had to say about Pakistani umpiring in his autobiography. 2. Imran actually believed in his own hype believing that they were good enough without home umpiring. Guess what he was in for a rude shock. Essentially rest of the world was proven cricket regarding Pakistan's record due to home umpiring. And the funny thing is lot of Pakistanis say "so what! Everyone used to do that including India" but they conveniently ignore the actual picture that no other team benefited from home umpiring as much as Pakistan. India's record before and after the advent of neutral umpiring clearly reflects the conclusion.

I wouldnt exactly put it this way. Imran had a good team, decently good batsmen -- backed up with good match winning bowlers. What they clearly lacked was the "zing" to win series. Even Wasim and Waqar as good as they were -- would blow hot and cold. They would be superb in one game and blow cold in the next and eventually would end up losing games. This is why they have an extremely poor series record abroad, except for their favorite whipping boys SL and NZ. They did not have it in them to be consistent and win games at a stretch.

[Ultimate_Game]

I wouldnt exactly put it this way. Imran had a good team, decently good batsmen -- backed up with good match winning bowlers. What they clearly lacked was the "zing" to win series. Even Wasim and Waqar as good as they were -- would blow hot and cold. They would be superb in one game and blow cold in the next and eventually would end up losing games. This is why they have an extremely poor series record abroad, except for their favorite whipping boys SL and NZ. They did not have it in them to be consistent and win games at a stretch.

Even against NZ they needed to tamper the ball to win :cantstop: Google "Chris Pringle ball tampering" or "Adam Parore ball tampering" and you will see some interesting articles. Here are the two, which are not from Indian media by the way just so padosis wouldn't get offended :winky: http://legacy.guardian.co.tt/archives/2006-09-26/SA-8.html http://www.nzherald.co.nz/sport/news/article.cfm?c_id=4&objectid=10624473 These articles provide an amazing insight into what went on in Paki cricket at home and why they have a stellar record at home or Sharjah. Here are some of the excerpts from the articles...

One of the most bizarre - and blatant - instances of ball tampering occurred during New Zealand's tour of Pakistan in the autumn of 1990. From the off, New Zealand expressed deep reservations about the way that the Pakistan bowlers got the ball to reverse swing, and the appearance of the ball. Most dismissed this as sour grapes as the tour had been in trouble before it started. Several leading New Zealanders opted out of making the trip, leading to Imran Khan also absenting himself after protesting at what he believed would be a "mismatch". And then when the Pakistan Cricket Board suggested appointing neutral umpires, Martin Crowe, New Zealand's captain, said that it had to be "better than having two Pakistani umpires". Unsurprisingly, the PCB did an about-turn and dropped the plan. In the opening Test at Karachi, New Zealand were twice bowled out for under 200 as Pakistan, thanks to 203 from Shoaib Mohammad, won by an innings. In the second Test at Lahore, Martin Crowe remembered that he encountered reverse-swing for the first time on his way to a second-innings hundred. "Six supposed outswingers [from Wasim Akram] suddenly became six lethal inswingers. I had never seen it before and I became curious." During the innings, Crowe dropped a delivery from Abdul Qadir at his feet and bent down to pick it up and lob it back to the bowler. "It was totally mutilated on one side with two or three deep scratches gouged out," he said. "I complained to the umpires but they did nothing." Later in the day the ball went out of shape and was changed. As it was thrown to the boundary by the umpires, Willie Watson and Mark Priest rushed to intercept it. "It bore no resemblance to a cricket ball," Crowe claimed. The pair took it back to the changing-room but, so Crowe noted, Intikhab Alam, the Pakistan manager, came in and took it and it was never seen again. Ian Taylor, the New Zealand manager, made an official complaint at the end of the match, but it was dismissed with the officials stating that the condition of the ball resulted from a rough outfield and advertising hoardings. "We accepted that Pakistan were the better team," Crowe added, "but we were not going to accept what they were doing with the ball." Chris Pringle, at the time New Zealand's opening bowler, decided to take the law into his own hands. "There was something going on," he recalled in his autobiography Save The Last Ball For Me. "And whether what I did was the right or wrong way to make the ball look as it did in the next Test, I had to try it." After another resounding defeat at Lahore, several of the New Zealanders experimented in the nets with scoring one side of an old ball with bottle tops. "With that technique, even guys like Mark Greatbatch and Martin Crowe were swinging the ball miles in the air," Pringle wrote. "We practised long and hard in the nets and were quite excited about the results we were getting with it." Crowe admitted that he ran in to bowl his normal inswingers "only to see the ball curve the other way ... I'd never bowled outswingers in my life!" On the morning of the first day of the final Test at Faisalabad, Pringle decided to put what he had learned into practice. He found an old bottle top, cut it into quarters, covered the serrated edge with tape, leaving a sharp point exposed. At the first drinks interval the umpires did not ask to look at the ball and, with Pakistan making sedate progress, Pringle started scratching the ball with the bottle top. Pakistan crashed from 35 for 0 to 102 all out. Pringle finished with his Test-best figures of 7 for 52. "Neither umpire showed any concern or took any notice in what we were doing even though, at the end of the innings, the ball was very scratched," Pringle noted. "One side was shiny but there were lots of grooves and lines and deep gouges on the other side. It was so obvious. It was ripped to shreds ... one side of the ball had been demolished. The umpires were walking across to each other and talking quite a lot. I sensed that they could tell what was going on ... but they didn't want to get involved in anything controversial." However, while the men in white remained implacable, others were wise to what was happening. Pringle recalled that as he left the stadium after taking his seven wickets on the first day, a local dignitary tapped him on the shoulder and said: "Pringle, it is fair now. Both teams are cheating." Although the umpires did not check the ball during each session, they did have it during intervals and at the close. And as the game wore on, Pringle became deliberately obvious in an attempt to get a reaction, even gouging the ball as he talked to the umpire. Still nothing was said. So eagerly was he vandalizing the ball that at one stage he cut himself on the jagged bottle top. Even the sight of a bowler with blood freely flowing from a sliced finger did not cause any disquiet as far as the officials were concerned. Pringle finished with 11 for 152 after taking 2 for 190 in the first two matches

I'd love to know what Shahid Afridi was actually trying to achieve by biting the ball during Pakistan's one-day match against Australia in Perth. Afridi has offered no real explanation and it remains a mystery. Occasionally players bite off loose bits of string and I thought he might use something like that as an excuse. The resulting uproar has reignited the debate about ball tampering. Some famous figures have suggested over the years that bowlers be allowed to doctor the ball more than they are now allowed, but I believe the rules are about right as they stand. Players are allowed to shine the ball, but not rough it up. To change this rule would be dangerous because where would the ball doctoring stop? The umpires would have a very difficult time trying to control the situation. Of course a New Zealand team I was in performed a very famous bit of ball tampering in Pakistan, retribution for what the home team had been doing. Chris Pringle was the major beneficiary in that 1990 test in Faisalabad, taking 11 wickets after we went to work with a bottle top. We had practised roughing the ball up with the bottle top in the nets before the test and I even managed to get some devastating late swing on the ball. Pakistan were the masters of ball tampering, and got away with it for 15 or 20 years because no one really knew what was going on.

[Sir_Afridi]

I wouldnt exactly put it this way. Imran had a good team, decently good batsmen -- backed up with good match winning bowlers. What they clearly lacked was the "zing" to win series. Even Wasim and Waqar as good as they were -- would blow hot and cold. They would be superb in one game and blow cold in the next and eventually would end up losing games. This is why they have an extremely poor series record abroad, except for their favorite whipping boys SL and NZ. They did not have it in them to be consistent and win games at a stretch.

Pakistan have the best abroad test record in 90s. :bow:

[Ultimate_Game]

Pakistan have the best abroad test record in 90s. :bow:

Yup, playing Eng, SL or NZ sure does that :cantstop: I wonder why Pakistan never managed to win away against WI? I mean even "weaker" teams like India have beaten WI away so how come such a "great" team as Pakistan not able to do so?