The Fight Against Bad Light

Legendary umpire Dickie Bird once famously said that the answer to bad light was “to play in all light, barring something close to Armageddon.”.

Off Again: Bad light is called at the Ageas Bowl

The issue of bad light in Test Cricket has been immeasurably examined since the COVID-19 restart. Whilst the critics have been at their most vociferous, and the umpires at their most cautious, both sides have their points. Whilst it is easy to sit back and critique the umpires for their apparent urgency to stop the game, we as the viewer must appreciate the fact that they are doing their job. There is a set of guidelines to adhere to, and a responsibility toward player safety.

The law change in 2010 of ‘bad light stopping play’ meant that the decision to leave the pitch due to bad light is now down solely to the umpires — no longer can they offer the batsmen the choice. This law change was brought in to stave off controversy, as it served as a chance for batting sides to use the law for tactical reasons — the 2009 Ashes at the Oval being the final straw. The current law is stated below:

Law 3.5.3 Suspension of play for adverse conditions of ground, weather or light

b) If at any time the umpires together agree that the conditions of ground, weather or light are so bad that there is obvious and foreseeable risk to the safety of any player or umpire, so that it would be unreasonable or dangerous for play to take place, then they shall immediately suspend play, or not allow play to commence or to restart. The decision as to whether conditions are so bad as to warrant such action is one for the umpires alone to make.

The Australian team leave the field in 2009 (Getty Images)

The light meters provided to umpires are universal worldwide, and the process of taking light is straightforward. The umpire points the light meter towards the sight-screen at the bowler’s end. The light meter does not have a certain light level that allows or disallows play, it just indicates whether the light level has improved or worsened since the previous reading. The tool gives umpires evidence to back up their decision, should they decide to stop play.

The bad light law is to protect players. Just for a moment, picture yourself stood at the crease, and an international fast bowler charging in just 22 yards away. A hard, leather dot comes flying towards you at 80mph, giving you maximum 0.52 seconds to react, whilst also moving laterally up to 15° from its original trajectory. Now picture the same image at 5pm on an overcast afternoon. A spine tingling-thought. Now no-one wants to do that.

We must remember that being a top-level batsman is a tormenting task and that the umpires are fully in charge of their safety. Whilst we criticise the umpires taking their meters out at any hint of gloominess, it is important to put yourself in their shoes, and the potential backlash they could face should a batsman be inflicted with injury. Player protection is more prolific than ever, with the unfortunate events in recent years of head-injuries especially driving the safety measures.

The on-field umpires stop and take a light reading

Match-day umpires are not law makers; as Joe Root stated, “It is something that needs looking at higher up the chain.”. The ICC take charge of altering the laws. It is their responsibility to make cricket more efficient with fewer unnecessary stoppages. Cricket in England is where we tend to see the law tested the most, thus as England fans we are most familiar with the frustration. Whilst patience is required with calling bad light, the issue lies in making up for lost time, and making those breaks as brief as possible.

Once players leave the field, light readings occur at 20-minute intervals at best. We have seen scenarios where play has been stopped, and there will not be another inspection for 30 minutes, regardless of changes in weather conditions. I sympathise that umpires and players need time to switch off, yet they should be expected (on selected match days) to be ready to play cricket at any time. There are enough officials both on and off the field to constantly assess light and make decisions on getting back out there. A constant measure should be taken, allowing the restart of play to be instant.

A further issue, once the conditions are deemed appropriate to play, is the time taken to get back out on-field. Again, I empathise with the need for players to warm up, and mentally return to a match readiness, yet we constantly see players lingering on the boundary, waiting for a stated restart time. Get the covers off and the players on — let’s see some cricket.

The players sit and wait for play to restart during a bad light break in Durban, 2004

Finally, as many have stated and seen over the last couple of days at the Ageas Bowl, start play before 11am. Alter the day’s play, to allow for cricket when conditions are getting lighter, as opposed to adding hours at the end of the day before dusk. Flexibility with start times is essential for successful cricket in England. Again, players are not used to earlier start times, however given notice, I strongly believe there will be no backlash.

This could well have been the perfect trial period, given the absence of fans in stadiums. This option of earlier start times means the players get to compete for 5 days’ worth of overs, the umpires take less backlash, and broadcasting teams get much-needed airtime. The sooner the ICC learn and adapt, the sooner the critics run out of ammunition.

Dan Chitty