SA Footy

For those that saw the Malinga run out on Friday night, where he had already grounded his bat, does anyone know if he was given a run, or should have been given a run?

For all intents and purposes I would have thought he had completed the run by grounding his bat, and then in the act of jumping (not for self-protection) has been deemed to have "moved out" of his crease while the ball was still live - like that unforgettable occasion that Murali did when he went to congrulate Sangakarra on his ton against NZ.

According to the great man, Richie Benaud, the batsman can only be given not out if, in the opinion of the umpire, he is evading the ball to prevent being struck by the throw.

regards,

REB

Correct call by the ump

Not disputing that be given out was the correct call. But I would have thought he had completed the run, and so have it added to his score.

The run is not completed until the ball is dead (I would think).

But if you're run out on the third run, you still get the two you have completed.

Very interesting question. Really should've been given the run but i hadn't thought of that till i read it here. Love to know whether he was credited with the run or not and if not can anyone explain why not?

Dogwatcher wrote:The run is not completed until the ball is dead (I would think).

Rod read above...

Dogwatcher wrote:

Dogwatcher wrote:The run is not completed until the ball is dead (I would think).

Rod read above...

I have but Flying High makes a very valid point above as well.

FlyingHigh wrote:But if you're run out on the third run, you still get the two you have completed.

My point above still stands though, whether it be the first or the third run.
The third run isn't counted, as it's not completed. The previous runs were completed.

Dogwatcher wrote:My point above still stands though, whether it be the first or the third run.
The third run isn't counted, as it's not completed. The previous runs were completed.

But that's my point. In my eyes the run was completed BEFORE they stumps were struck, he was out of his ground and was given out.

FlyingHigh wrote:

Dogwatcher wrote:My point above still stands though, whether it be the first or the third run.
The third run isn't counted, as it's not completed. The previous runs were completed.

But that's my point. In my eyes the run was completed BEFORE they stumps were struck, he was out of his ground and was given out.

Exactly. He made his ground before the stumps were broken. No different to if he had made his ground then set off for another run.

Remember though the same rule applies with a stumping. A player's shot could be completed, lifts his foot by accident then *bang* stumped. Same principle.

Dogwatcher wrote:Remember though the same rule applies with a stumping. A player's shot could be completed, lifts his foot by accident then *bang* stumped. Same principle.

Not really. Different scenario. What would have been different had he made his ground, set off for another run then the stumps were broken? The run should count as he made his ground. I cannot see how it is different if you make your ground set off for another run then get run out or if you make your ground, drop the bat and get run out. Either way the run has been completed then the batsman is caught out of the crease.

You know, I think FlyingHigh is right.

Dissident wrote:You know, I think FlyingHigh is right.

Hooray, first time since I joined this site

you guys are kidding yourselves.

You only get completed runs (someone said it above) if you get run out running the third, two runs count. If you get run out running the first you get none.

Can common sense please prevail. Just cos his bat was grounded means nothing if you're not holding it.

gadj1976 wrote:you guys are kidding yourselves.

You only get completed runs (someone said it above) if you get run out running the third, two runs count. If you get run out running the first you get none.

Can common sense please prevail. Just cos his bat was grounded means nothing if you're not holding it.

But he was holding it when it was grounded. He didn't throw the bat over the line. If he set off for the second run and was run out the first run would've counted.

rod_rooster wrote:

gadj1976 wrote:you guys are kidding yourselves.

You only get completed runs (someone said it above) if you get run out running the third, two runs count. If you get run out running the first you get none.

Can common sense please prevail. Just cos his bat was grounded means nothing if you're not holding it.

But he was holding it when it was grounded. He didn't throw the bat over the line. If he set off for the second run and was run out the first run would've counted.

yep, ie, out - no run

gadj1976 wrote:

rod_rooster wrote:

gadj1976 wrote:you guys are kidding yourselves.

You only get completed runs (someone said it above) if you get run out running the third, two runs count. If you get run out running the first you get none.

Can common sense please prevail. Just cos his bat was grounded means nothing if you're not holding it.

But he was holding it when it was grounded. He didn't throw the bat over the line. If he set off for the second run and was run out the first run would've counted.

yep, ie, out - no run

But he had completed the run, holding his bat, before the stumps were broken, at which point it had fallen out of his hands, and this is why he was not in his crease.