Journal article
Is the pink ball still under review? Cricket umpires' perceptions of the pink ball for day/night matches
Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport, Vol.24(11), pp.1166-1172
2021
PMID: 33824081
Abstract
Objectives
The visibility of the pink ball used in day/night Test cricket has been under scrutiny, with recent research suggesting cricketers find the pink ball less visible at dusk under floodlights. With increasing interest in this match format, this study sought to investigate elite umpires’ opinions pertaining to the visibility of the pink cricket ball during day/night matches.
Design
Purposeful sampling of a cross-section of elite umpires with experience adjudicating matches played using a pink cricket ball.
Methods
Twenty-seven international/first-class umpires completed a questionnaire consisting of Likert scale and free text responses covering perceptions of the pink cricket ball, with a particular emphasis on visibility.
Results
The pink ball when viewed at night under floodlights was rated as being significantly more visible than the red ball during natural lighting (ps < 0.050). Umpires who actively participated in training reported a significantly higher rating of the visibility of the pink ball (mean −3.14) at night under floodlights compared to those who didn’t (mean p = 0.010). No significant difference was reported in visibility in natural light or dusk under floodlights. Free text responses (n = 10) revealed the following themes: use of eyewear (coverage 0.30), and adjustment to positioning (coverage 0.20) to improve visibility of the pink ball.
Conclusions
Umpires report the visibility of the pink ball is equal to the red in natural light and at dusk but is significantly better at night. Preference for the pink ball is likely due to the predominantly perceptual nature of visual tasks performed by umpires.
Details
- Title
- Is the pink ball still under review? Cricket umpires' perceptions of the pink ball for day/night matches
- Authors
- Robert Maguire - Anglia Ruskin UniversityMatthew A. Timmis - Anglia Ruskin UniversityLuke Wilkins - Nottingham Trent UniversityDavid L. Mann - Vrije Universiteit AmsterdamEldre Beukes - Anglia Ruskin UniversityHaimisha Parekh - Anglia Ruskin UniversityJames A. Johnstone - Anglia Ruskin UniversityJoshua M. Adie - Queensland University of TechnologyDerek Arnold - University of QueenslandPeter M. Allen (Corresponding Author) - Anglia Ruskin University
- Publication details
- Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport, Vol.24(11), pp.1166-1172
- Publisher
- Elsevier Australia
- Date published
- 2021
- DOI
- 10.1016/j.jsams.2021.03.011
- ISSN
- 1878-1861
- PMID
- 33824081
- Organisation Unit
- School of Health - Psychology
- Language
- English
- Record Identifier
- 991101937202621
- Output Type
- Journal article
Metrics
1 Record Views
InCites Highlights
These are selected metrics from InCites Benchmarking & Analytics tool, related to this output
- Collaboration types
- Domestic collaboration
- International collaboration
- Web Of Science research areas
- Sport Sciences