|
Post by nompere on Jul 7, 2006 18:51:02 GMT
In over number 19, Fred bowled left arm round the wicket.
After over number 20 we took drinks.
Over number 21 started and the bowler came (unannounced to me) right arm over the wicket.
I was about to call "No Ball", when I realised that this was John, so I called "Dead Ball" instead - which was perhaps fortunate as the batsman said he knew they had changed bowler.
Law 24 covers the case of a bowler changing his action but there does not seem to be anything in Law about changing a bowler between overs (other than not bowling two overs consecutively)
What would you have done? Would it make any difference if the new bowler had the same action as the previous one?
|
|
|
Post by wisden17 on Jul 10, 2006 12:40:56 GMT
The fault seems here to lie with you, and you have failed to notice a change in the actual bowler. This mean that you have failed to follow Law 24.1 "The umpire shall ascertain whether the bowler intends to bowl right handed or left handed, over or round the wicket, and shall so inform the striker." You have not ascertained the bowler's action as you have failed to notice the need to do so.
Your action to call dead ball then was correct, although it should not have needed to come to that. The point about a bowler having the same action as the last is unimportant, as you need to ascertain this before he bowls, so you can inform the striker, it is no good simply waiting to see what he bowls, and hope for the best.
I'm surprised you didn't notice the change in bowling intially though. Did the new bowler not mark out a new run-up for example?
|
|
|
Post by nompere on Jul 11, 2006 13:25:05 GMT
The bowlers were generally of a similar physical appearance and, if the second one did mark his run of a similar length, then it was during the drinks interval. Neither wore caps or sweaters.
|
|
|
Post by wisden17 on Jul 12, 2006 22:44:12 GMT
Ah I see, much like the proverbial problem of identical twins playing in a match, and the problems that can cause for scorers!
Well I think you did the best thing you could in the circumstances then. I suppose there is a case for umpires in law having to be informed, say by the captain of the fielding side, when bowlers change. Although I must admit it is never a problem I've come across before.
|
|