Page 2 of 2
Re: Controversial Run Out
Posted:
Wed Jan 25, 2017 12:24 pmby jackpot jim
FlyingHigh wrote:Didn't see this one, but there was a similar one with Malinga from SL in Australia a few years ago.
What I want to know is, is the run awarded, because if not, at what point does a run count?
Fascinating question that !
I dont see any reason why that run wouldn't have counted but i bet it wasn't.
Must say that this has been the most sensibly discussed thread i have ever read on here.
Re: Controversial Run Out
Posted:
Wed Jan 25, 2017 12:25 pmby Booney
That appears, in all reality, to be a shit decision. He'd grounded his bat, he'd made his ground. Terrible call IMO.
Re: Controversial Run Out
Posted:
Wed Jan 25, 2017 12:30 pmby RustyCage
Booney wrote:That appears, in all reality, to be a shit decision. He'd grounded his bat, he'd made his ground. Terrible call IMO.
More so, it's a terrible law of the game. The umpire made the correct decision, but should that have been what the laws state is correct? I don't think so
Re: Controversial Run Out
Posted:
Wed Jan 25, 2017 1:03 pmby Bombers4EVA
Even if the batter has the intent to run again. If the bat is on the ground inside his crease and both his feet are in the air. I believe he should still be safe.
Re: Controversial Run Out
Posted:
Wed Jan 25, 2017 10:54 pmby daysofourlives
I have another question the laws of the game,
Is the wicket keeper included in the 5 fieldsman that are allowed outside the circle in one day cricket? Can you have 5 plus the wicketkeeper on the boundary?
Re: Controversial Run Out
Posted:
Wed Jan 25, 2017 11:03 pmby LaughingKookaburra
It's out in my books. It's Test Cricket not a hit in the park. Focus as a batsman and slide your bat and you don't have an issue. If it gets stuck in the ground and bounces out your hand that's bad luck as it could have happened to either team.
Re: Controversial Run Out
Posted:
Wed Jan 25, 2017 11:13 pmby Jim05
daysofourlives wrote:I have another question the laws of the game,
Is the wicket keeper included in the 5 fieldsman that are allowed outside the circle in one day cricket? Can you have 5 plus the wicketkeeper on the boundary?
My understanding is that the wicket keeper must be in the circle
Re: Controversial Run Out
Posted:
Thu Jan 26, 2017 9:27 amby daysofourlives
Jim05 wrote:daysofourlives wrote:I have another question the laws of the game,
Is the wicket keeper included in the 5 fieldsman that are allowed outside the circle in one day cricket? Can you have 5 plus the wicketkeeper on the boundary?
My understanding is that the wicket keeper must be in the circle
What about when the bowler is lightening quick and the Keeper and 1st slip are outside the circle in the 1st 10 overs, does that mean no one else can be outside the circle?
Re: Controversial Run Out
Posted:
Thu Jan 26, 2017 9:56 amby Jim05
daysofourlives wrote:Jim05 wrote:daysofourlives wrote:I have another question the laws of the game,
Is the wicket keeper included in the 5 fieldsman that are allowed outside the circle in one day cricket? Can you have 5 plus the wicketkeeper on the boundary?
My understanding is that the wicket keeper must be in the circle
What about when the bowler is lightening quick and the Keeper and 1st slip are outside the circle in the 1st 10 overs, does that mean no one else can be outside the circle?
I'd imagine so, not sure I've ever seen that before but I know that if the umpire deems the keeper to be in a unrealistic position they can ask them to give up their pads and gloves and he becomes just a regular fielder. There is no law saying you must have a keeper but the amount of fielders inside the circle must remain the same
Re: Controversial Run Out
Posted:
Fri Jan 27, 2017 9:14 amby Trader
Good question!
There was an old rule that seems to have gone these days about having 2 men in catching positions in the first 15 overs. These fieldsmen had to be within 15 yards of the bat, however the cordon was allowed to be further than 15 back, and were still considered men in catching positions.
Given this, perhaps there is something that says the keeper can be further than 30 yards back.
Re: Controversial Run Out
Posted:
Fri Jan 27, 2017 4:01 pmby FlyingHigh
GWW wrote:http://wwos.nine.com.au/2017/01/24/10/57/cricket-run-out-law-makes-no-sense-hesson
Thanks GWW.
That is snot.
Re: Controversial Run Out
Posted:
Fri Jan 27, 2017 6:29 pmby Grahaml
Jim05 wrote:daysofourlives wrote:Jim05 wrote:daysofourlives wrote:I have another question the laws of the game,
Is the wicket keeper included in the 5 fieldsman that are allowed outside the circle in one day cricket? Can you have 5 plus the wicketkeeper on the boundary?
My understanding is that the wicket keeper must be in the circle
What about when the bowler is lightening quick and the Keeper and 1st slip are outside the circle in the 1st 10 overs, does that mean no one else can be outside the circle?
I'd imagine so, not sure I've ever seen that before but I know that if the umpire deems the keeper to be in a unrealistic position they can ask them to give up their pads and gloves and he becomes just a regular fielder. There is no law saying you must have a keeper but the amount of fielders inside the circle must remain the same
This is accurate.
In terms of the laws regarding fielders, neither the bowler nor wicket keeper would be included in any restrictions (including the 2 men behind square rule). Therefore where he stands in regards to the inner circle is irrelevant, it's only based on being able to perform his duties as a wicketkeeper.
Re: Controversial Run Out
Posted:
Mon Jan 30, 2017 10:29 amby mighty_tiger_79
Teams playing Australia
Just wait for when Warner gets a hundred and runs off and does his Toyota leap and run him out!
Re: Controversial Run Out
Posted:
Tue Mar 07, 2017 11:49 amby Trader
Trader wrote:Yeah it's an interesting one.
The third umpire got it correct to the current laws. (By the way, well done to Nigel Long for sending it upstairs, most umpires would have given it a simple not out on field as it seemed obvious he was home).
The laws changed some time to say once you've made your ground, if you're running naturally, you're considered in your crease. This came about as a result of slow mo cameras showing both feet to be off the ground at the same time while simply running, which clearly isn't meant to be out when the laws of the game were written back in 18-dickety-2. Essentially the laws were "modernised" to keep up with technology and maintain the intent they were first written.
For mine, the interesting one is when a batsman dives to make his crease, and the bat "bounces". Often you now see the third umpire heavily scrutinizing footage to determine when the bounce either started or finished, and where this coincides with the bails being removed. For mine, that's not the intent of the law, and should be reconsidered.
I'd like to see the law along the lines of "once you've made your ground, you're considered in your crease unless you voluntarily* leave your crease" - the current caveat of "avoiding injury" should also remain.
* - this probably isn't the correct word, as a stumping where a player overbalances isn't voluntary, but should be out - but hopefully you get what I mean.
The above would have seen Wagner considered safe, and that's the intent I believe the law was originally written with.
Seems the MCC are reading our posts!
http://www.cricket.com.au/news/bat-size ... 2017-03-07The MCC has also announced a change to protect batsmen from 'bouncing bat' run outs.
Once a batsman has grounded their bat beyond the popping crease but their "continued forward momentum towards the stumps" results in the willow losing contact with safe territory when the wicket is put down, the batsman will not be run out.