ABSTRACT
Former Australian captain and current Channel 9 commentator, Ian Chappell, offers an excellent historical example of the interpretive ambiguity and complexity surrounding ideas and practices of respect for the umpire’s decision in cricket. During a One-Day game against the West Indies at VFL park (during the days of World Series Cricket) Collis King appeared to ‘edge’ a catch behind to Rodney Marsh from the bowling of Max Walker. Fielding at deep gully, Chappell had a good view of the batter and was certain that King had indeed snicked the ball. Umpire Col Hoy at the non-striker’s end gave King not out, and did not check with the umpire at square leg. Chappell, as captain, went to ask umpire Hoy the reason for his decision. For him, if the umpire had refused the appeal because he thought the ball had not struck the bat, that would have been the end of the matter, even if Chappell believed the batter had given an edge. This was, for Chappell, a matter of judgement for the umpire alone and was not open to any dispute. On the other hand, Chappell felt that if the umpire had refused the appeal because he thought the catch had not been made, he was, as captain, perfectly entitled to request that the square leg umpire be consulted.
