Date: Sun, 22 Apr
2001 18:52:40 +0800 (HKT)
From: Ravi
Goonetilleke ravindra@ust.hk
Cc: mark.harrison@icc.cricket.org
Subject: Can
umpires be ranked?
Dear Rick,
First and foremost thanks for the
good information on CRICinfo and the live coverage of the games. Even being an associate member of the ICC,
we in Hong Kong don't have any live coverage of cricket. Thanks to Cricinfo, we
are still able to keep in touch with the sport. I don't understand why the Hong Kong Cricket Association cannot
promote the sport through some live coverage.
Anyway, I am writing on a different
issue. I saw that you took a poll on
whether umpires should be penalised for poor decisions. Even if an umpire is penalised, there may be
other sources through which they can cover up their losses. I have a different
suggestion, which I have outlined here which may eventually result in improved
umpiring standards too. The primary reason is that these umpires also need to
be recognized for the job they do. In
recent times, the human limitations of umpires standing out there in extreme
weather conditions over long periods of time are becoming more and more
apparent with the use of video technology.
As a result, I think it is time,
that a ranking or rating system be developed based on the quality of decisions.
This is not at all difficult as I have shown here. Every time there is an appeal, the umpire says yes (out) or no
(not out). These decisions fall into
four basic categories:
1. Umpire correct
in giving out
2. The umpire
MISSED giving out
3. False Alarm -
where the umpire incorrectly gave out when he should not have done so
4. Correct
Rejection - where the umpire correctly declined an appeal
In terms of a
well developed technique called Signal Detection Theory (SDT) very commonly
used when people inspect quality in products, these are the same as
Proportion(P) of HITS, Proportion of MISSES, proportion of FALSE ALARMS, and
proportion of CORRECT REJECTIONS. If you look at these four measures, it is
clear that:
P(Hits) +
P(misses) = 1
P(False Alarms) +
P(correct Rejections) = 1
So if two of the
four are known, the other two may be calculated. At the end of each game, the
match referee can produce the information with respect to the proportion of
hits and the proportion of false alarms. (i.e., two out of the four). If these two proportions are known, it is very
easy to determine a quantifiable number (called Criterion in SDT) for each
umpire for all the games they've stood in all "official" games. This number can be the basis for
umpire rating or ranking. As I know, there is hardly any information about the
quality of umpiring decisions even though one may say "X" is a better
umpire than "Y" or "P" country's umpires are better than
those of "Q". The method I am
suggesting will motivate the umpires to do the right thing and be recognized
for their quality.
I hope you will be able to follow-up
on this issue with the ICC. Looking forward to your thoughts. Thank you.
Cheers
Ravi Goonetilleke
The desk of:
Ravindra
Goonetilleke, Ph.D. Phone:(852)-2358-7109
Dept. of
Industrial Engineering & Engineering Management
Hong Kong Univ.
of Science & Technology Fax:
(852)-2358-0062
Clear Water Bay,
Hong Kong Email:ravindra@ust.hk
WWW: http://www-ieem.ust.hk/dfaculty/ravi/ravi.html
==================================================================