Without a BAT ?

[moosa]

Can a batsman come on to the field without a bat? He says he wishes to get out first ball!

I have gone through Tom Smith and found NOTHING

Sir I am sorry for my easy previous questions.

[wisden17]

Nothing in the law to stop a batsman coming out to "bat" without a bat. The only time when a player is required to have a bat is when acting as a runner, where the law specifically states he must carry a bat (even though the injured striker in not compelled to do so).

An odd situation, and I would presume you are suggesting the batsman reitres as soon as the game begins? If he doesn't and tries to hit the ball, say, with his hands he could be out handled the ball.

[Acumen]

Would it not be easier if he refuses to come out and is declared Timed Out ?

[wisden17]

Here's a question though: could you consider a batsman not wishing to come out and bat a refusal to play, under Law 21?

[moosa]

yes after the umpires wait for three minutes give a batsman and wait for few minutes if the other batsman does not come they will go into the dressing room to see if this is refusul to play . please go through the law 31 in tom smiths cricket umpiring and scoring

[wisden17]

Well, not quite Moosa. After 3 minutes the umpires should call time, and then go and see what is happening. The captain of the batting side can then choose who is going to be out, timed out.

The question really is: could you consider a batsman not wishing to actually play being tantamount to a whole side refusing to play?

[topumpire1]

Jul 29, 2006 22:14:16 GMT wisden17 said:

Here's a question though: could you consider a batsman not wishing to come out and bat a refusal to play, under Law 21?

No, so long as alater batsman IS prepared to bat after the first batsman has been timed out

[srinivasan]

This discussion brings another question in my mind: Can Umpire at the bowler's end call "Play" without the batsman (batsmen) on the field if time to call "Play" is reached? Let’s take the following scenario.

Bowler's end Umpire calls "Time" when a batsman is dismissed with two balls remaining in the over just before a three minutes scheduled drinks interval. The fielders, the not-out batsman and Umpires are now having their drinks when a new batsman walks in. He comes up to the pitch and is having a chat with his partner when the captain of the batting side calls him back as he wants to send another batsman in. This is absolutely in order as the new batsman is not deemed to have commenced his innings. However, now the time for drinks is elapsed and there is only one batsman in the ground. Umpires, fielding side players and the not out batsman at the bowler's end are ready to resume the match but there is no striker. Clearly there is no intention for the batting side captain "not" to play as he is intending to send another batsman and the non striker is still in the middle.

This raises two questions in my mind.

1. Can the Bowler's end Umpire now call "play" since time is reached, without the striker?
2. What should be the time allowed for the Umpire to wait before answering an appeal for "Timed Out" for the incoming batsman?

This is not a real scenario but something that came up in my mind a few days back before I read this post and thought would add some value to the already discussed issue. I think Mr. Singh is right in saying this issue has not got due attention. Probably, there is something for the Law makers here.

Law 16.1 (Call of Play) only states “The bowler’s end Umpire shall call “Play” at the start of a match and on the resumption of play after any interval or interruption” without any reference to the players on the field.