|
|
Post by rajeshpaul on Jun 17, 2013 18:38:11 GMT
In running up to delivery,a bowler spots that the batsman is standing out of his ground.Quick as a flash he throws the ball with all his might,catches the striker by surprise and the ball breaks the wicket and an appeal is made.What will be the further occurence?
|
|
|
|
Post by missingleg on Jun 17, 2013 19:34:11 GMT
no ball & out. See laws 24 & 42.
|
|
|
|
Post by duncanfrancis on Jun 25, 2013 15:19:15 GMT
This would be out, but also a no ball but only be done upto the point where the bowler enters his delivery stride !
|
|
|
|
Post by Dave on Feb 20, 2016 14:14:04 GMT
The striker is onto this plot and cover-drives the half-volley throw for four. Is this obstructing the field by action, or a reasonable response to a thrown delivery?
|
|
|
|
Post by missingleg on Feb 20, 2016 17:29:17 GMT
What a question!
|
|
|
|
Post by missingleg on Feb 28, 2016 23:04:15 GMT
I guess it would be a no-ball and four runs
|
|
|
|
Post by cricket adictor on Mar 18, 2016 17:58:12 GMT
1)The umpires pronounced the pitch unfit but, when the captains insisted, allowed play to take
place under Law 3.9 (b). How can the umpires be the final judges of the fitness of the ground,
weather and light for play as stated in Law 3.8, if Law 3.9 allows the captains nevertheless to
decide whether play is to take place or not?
2)
An injured striker has a runner. The runner remains within his ground at the striker’s end, but the injured striker and the non-striker both run, and both make good the ground at the opposite end.The fielder throw the ball to the strikers end wicket.In this scenario any body out.
|
|
|
|
Post by bjmajor on Mar 20, 2016 7:59:59 GMT
1)The umpires pronounced the pitch unfit but, when the captains insisted, allowed play to take place under Law 3.9 (b). How can the umpires be the final judges of the fitness of the ground, weather and light for play as stated in Law 3.8, if Law 3.9 allows the captains nevertheless to decide whether play is to take place or not? 2) An injured striker has a runner. The runner remains within his ground at the striker’s end, but the injured striker and the non-striker both run, and both make good the ground at the opposite end.The fielder throw the ball to the strikers end wicket.In this scenario any body out. 1) I'm not sure where you are reading that the captains can insist a game is played. Law 3.8(a) states It is solely for the umpires together to decide whether either conditions of ground, weather or light or exceptional circumstances mean that it would be dangerous or unreasonable for play to take place.Law 3.9(b) reads as follows: If at any time the umpires together agree that the conditions of ground, weather or light, or any other circumstances are dangerous or unreasonable, they shall immediately suspend play, or not allow play to start or to recommence.
Umpires should not allow a game to be played in conditions that they deem unsuitable just because the captains insist. 2) The injured striker is run out in this scenario. As per Law 29.2(e): When a batsman who has a runner is striker, his ground is always at the wicket-keeper’s end. It therefore does not matter if the runner is "in" at the strikers end, or if the non striker is also "in" at the strikers end. The sriker is not in his ground and is run out. |
|
|
|
Post by Antipodean on Mar 20, 2016 12:47:04 GMT
You may have an outdated version of the laws. I *think* it was the 2010 amendments that changed the wording to make the umpires solely responsible for these matters. Prior to that there was a captains override clause. If you wanted to read the most current version of the laws: www.lords.org/mcc/laws-of-cricket/laws/law-3-the-umpires/ |
|
|
|
Post by tippex2 on Mar 21, 2016 10:59:25 GMT
Antipodean is correct. Before 2010, the umpires had to decide which of 3 levels conditions were at - Suitable (play had to take place), Unsuitable (play could take place only if both captains agreed), Unreasonable or Dangerous (no play was allowed).
The 2010 changes essentially removed the middle one of these stages, and therefore the umpires decide whether conditions are unreasonable or dangerous, and play must not take place if the answer is affirmative.
As an aside this hasn't, in my experience, stopped captains or players giving umpires the 'benefit' of their thoughts on changing weather conditions....
|
|
|
|
Post by missingleg on Mar 22, 2016 15:06:00 GMT
Tippex I think it has allowed for more cricket to be played as we now have to carry on in 'unsuitable (level 2)' conditions. Sadly, I have noticed at professional levels they still go off at this stage. And yes, whoever happens to be losing will moan we haven't gone off earlier! Such a grey area.
|
|
|
|
Post by Acumen on Apr 29, 2016 16:09:33 GMT
Please see new thread on Weather Related Issues.
|
|
