It was generally accepted that Brian Jerling made some very poor decisions yesterday (mostly against Ireland, but there were a few Sami LBW shouts that could easily have gone with the bowler) but I don't think I have ever so many as bad as his decision to give Botha out caught at short leg.

There was no obvious noise and the bat was the other side of his leg when the ball connected with the pad. I have seen some very poor decisions (Trescothick being given out in Sri Lanka to a ball that was so far outside the leg stump on pitching it was nearer the cut strip then the line of the stumps was one, Jayasuriya given out by a ball that nearly bounced twice) but I think that one by Jerling, may have been one of the worst I have ever seen.

Anyone else recall a worse decision?

Are we including Englands tour of Pakistan in 1987 .

Seriously, IMO no professional umpire should get that easy a decision wrong. The borderline ones you can understand.

Because the umpires are under no real pressure from thr ICC if they make bad mistakes they can keep on making them.

__________________
Mark.

There were a couple of terrible decisions in the Sri Lanka vs South Africa match in the 1999 World Cup. Shaun Pollock was given out to a defensive shot that bounced to the ground a full foot from his bat after he played it and then popped into the fileder's hands - not a simple 'bump ball'. In the same innings, one other SA batsman (Gibbs?) tried to clear the boundary with a full-blooded hit; the SL outfielder caught it for a split second (and no more), but seeing that his own momentum was going to take him over the boundary rope, threw the ball away as he went over. He had not held the ball for more than fraction of a second and yet the SA batsman was given out.

But justice was done in the end; if I recall correctly, South Africa went on to win that match.

Poor decisions, well just look for matches involving Hair. The poorest decision I can remember was by Hair in the 1992 WC SA vs Australia. Boon "middled" the ball to 1st or 2nd slip and Hair gave him not out. Also, before neutral umpires, anything that pitched outside leg stump going on to hit from Warne was given out by Hair.

Can anyone remember when the ball hit Tendulkar's helmet and he was given out LBW LOL.

I agree with you guys that Jerlings decision must be ranked in the top 3, (the other 2 from Hair of course)

__________________
434, world record for the shortest period. Whos choking now?

Haha! Nothing wrong with that dismissal gibbs_fan. Its a commonly held misconception that this was not out. If you read the lbw law, you will see that you can be out if the ball hits you ANYWHERE - it doesn't have to involve the legs. The only part of the body that you can't be lbw from is the gloves!!

Now, obviously the ball still has to be hitting the stumps and meet all the other lbw requirements, but as I recall the ball that you are talking about would have gone on to hit the top of middle and leg and thus the umpire was correct to give it out.

You are correct Andy. You will see that I never said that it was a poor decision. I just asked if anyone can remember it. You are correct in saying that it is out. I just feel that not many umpires would have given that out but the umpire in question was quite right in giving it out.

Another thing that bothers me with umpires is that they are all afraid to give out those close LBW decisions like when the bat and pad are close but the ball hits the pad first. Rarely do we see these decisions given out, yet sometimes the batsman is quite plumb. What are your thoughts?

__________________
434, world record for the shortest period. Whos choking now?

Fair enough g_f... I misinterpreted what you said...

As for your second point, I guess the reason why those decisions where the bat is very close to the pad and there are two noises are not given is the whole 'benefit of the doubt goes to the batsman'. Where the batsman should give those decisions is when there is only one noise, and it ain't the sound of ball on wood. In these instances, the umpire should be thinking 'I've only heard ball on pad, therefore it has to be out'. If the umpire has given the benefit of the doubt when he's only heard ball/pad noise then he's made a bad decision, and could well be a little bit weak willed.

It is very tough to judge whether ball hit bat or pad first when there are two sounds and they are very close together. Can you be sure the noise you heard first was pad? You heard some ball on wood there, was it the first sound or the second? Very tough call...

Btw, I take it you enjoyed gibbs' onslaught the other day??

My thoughts are based around one simple, but much forgotten phrase

"The benefit of the doubt goes to the batsman"

If the Umpire is unsure about any aspect of an appeal, then he must give the benefit to the batter. The problem toay is that our TV guys can slow things down, look at a snickometer, track the path of the ball and in many decision they can have a certainty that the naked eye would never have.

I have no problems at all with an umpire getting the close one wrong (if they give the benefit the right way) my problem is the umpire that gets things so wrong.

The Botha decision is a case in point, the ball and bat where nowhere near each other, and yet, he was given out. Look at the reaction of Niall O'Brien, he was in total disbelief, he is the only other player that gets a similar view to the standing umpire, and if he can see it, why couldn't Jerling?

Peter Parker failed to give Davison out lbw to Plunkett yesterday and he was as plumb in front as you can get. Hawkete suggested the ball would have hit half way up middle!!

On the subject of lbw hit helmet; I remember watching Franklyn Stephenson bowling for Notts for a good few years getting lbw decisions with his looping slower ball. Many a batsman was out hit on the helmet or on the back.

But NE, I have no problems with that, LBW's are very hard to call, and Umpires have so many factors to take into account. If he had a doubt he would have given that to the batter (hopefully) the problems then is that the TV guys get Hawkeye out and any doubt that the umpire may have had looks foolish.