Thanks to Mike, I read this article at the SMH giving evidence to Mark Richardson and Bob Woolmer’s claims of umpires’ favouring Australians. Although I wasn’t suprised by Woolmer’s initial comments (he’s quite a statto-geek and very analytical in his coaching method) they sounded outlandish. But this latest article does add some weight to his theory, especially on LBW (1 2) decisions.
“Perhaps Richardson’s interest was sparked by a look at Adam Gilchrist and Ricky Ponting. Gilchrist has not been dismissed lbw in his past 42 Test innings at home, but has been removed lbw six times in his past 32 dismissals abroad. In ODIs, Ponting has been lbw once in his past 42 home games, and seven times from his past 47 overseas.” [via SMH]
Interesting reading. Of course, the argument in defence by the Australians – and I tend to agree – is they’ve been significantly better than everyone else for a decade. Which they have. Old Man Waugh backs this up in saying “Itâ€™s just that the Aussies create more opportunities and when you create more opportunities there is bound to be more appealingâ€¦”
Is this an issue we’ll look back on in a few years and question why we didn’t do more? Or is this yet more proof of world cricket’s domination by the Australians, and everyone else running to catch up?