I fear for Monty
No, not because he isn't England's number 1 spinner any more. Because when he does play it seems that the ICC are keen to clamp down on his massively over-excited appealing.
This is a guy who doesn't know the laws of the game (clearly given the way he frantically appeals for LBWs that can't possibly be out), and has proven that he can't work an umpire to save his life.
From here on in, I'd be counting on taking home 75% of any future match fees if I was Monty....
2 comments:
Not quite sure what "work the umpire" means but good umpires are not influenced by the antics of a bowler. In the case of Monty, I saw at least two occasions when he appealed three times as he loped down the pitch.
My response would be to speak to the captain and tell him to stop Monty acting like an idiot.
Hmmm, as a past captain of nutters I can confirm that it is near impossible to keep them under control as a captain! I wouldn't like to be Strauss trying to keep Panesar under control!
In terms of working the umpires, I realise that it's probably offensive to umpires for players to think that if they develop an amicable relationship with an umpire they might get more borderline decisions going their way. But rightly or wrongly that's the perception.
So for me working the umpire is remembering his name when you meet him, having the odd chat with him on the field, buying him a beer afterwards etc. But most of all, having variations of appeals - i.e. the "questioning" one, the "it might be", and the "that's plumb" appeal - the last being more likely to work on a borderline decision when used sparingly. Whether it has any effect depends on the umpire I suppose.
Post a Comment