20/20 Tactics

[Beutbrute]

I came across this extraordinary clip of bowling and batting, which brings into question the law regarding the 'batsmans normal stance' and the wide rule

http://www.lords.org/mcc/laws-of-cricket/laws/law-25-wide-ball/

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but to my knowledge the 'batsmans normal stance' is not a defined area (ie a defined standard using the return crease or one day international wide markings), but presumably differs depending on individual batsmans stance, and their position while they are preparing for the bowler to bowl.
I was wondering how other people interpret this law, and how it could affect bowling and batting stances at the death.

 

[Art Vandelay_]

Keep showing all 3 stumps and it took until the last over to actually aim at the stumps. If he can hit full balls behind the line of his pads good luck to him. He'll miss more than hit hits. Aim at the stumps

 

[copthat]

Really dumb bowling.

 

[GeelongFTW]

Starc showed bopara what he thought of his stance.

 

[Power Raid]

bowlers will adapt and keep the batsmen honest

 

[Underarm]

Batsmen complicated the offside as a scoring opportunity, plus made it almost impossible to bowl a wide.

 

[Bomberboyokay]

Twenty20 is making players more creative with their limited time.

Also impressive crowd of 30 people in that clip.

 

[SEN_Fan]

Elliot did this yesterday against Sri Lanka and they weren't happy with it.

 

[Adelaide Hawk]

Cricket is becoming ridiculous.

 

[Marklar_33]

Cricket is becoming ridiculous.

You've been saying this for a long time now, unsure why you still bother with it


Very surprised it took 2 1/2 overs to aim at the stumps, but I'm assuming this Ellis lad has made his crust out of this around the wicket tactic

 

[Power Raid]

Cricket is becoming ridiculous.

Test matches are still great

and T20 is silly but enjoyable


so I don't see the issue

 

[Adelaide Hawk]

You've been saying this for a long time now, unsure why you still bother with it


Very surprised it took 2 1/2 overs to aim at the stumps, but I'm assuming this Ellis lad has made his crust out of this around the wicket tactic

FFS, if you don't like my posts, put me on ignore. Don't waste my time my replying to my posts.

 

[Art Vandelay_]

Cricket is becoming ridiculous.

Normal stance and normal cricket shots aren't anymore, now you need to be a hipster with all the fancy shots/footwork.

Give me a gloriously timed cover drive any day!

 

[GeelongFTW]

If you don't like t20 why on earth are you on a thread that says '20/20 tactics'?

Far out.

 

[Mateyman]

Is the bowler stupid? All that need was a couple yorkers/good length balls on the stumps, pretty simple

 

[Marklar_33]

FFS, if you don't like my posts, put me on ignore. Don't waste my time my replying to my posts.

If you don't like t20 why on earth are you on a thread that says '20/20 tactics'?

Far out.

 

[FlowersByIrene]

Is this issue here that it would be a wide if he bowled down the legs (but outside of off stump) is that what the confusion is about?

As a former grade umpire I'm honestly perplexed by this.

If it was me umpiring, I'd tell the batsmen he's being a bit stupid and take it a bit of both ways

No ball if it pitches off the pitch
Good delivery even if it's outside the lines if the batsmen is standing out there
Good delivery if it's behind yhe legs but on or outside the off stump
Wide if it's down past leg stump

 

[Zarrix]

Remember doing a similar thing on Shane Warne Cricket 99

 

[Marklar_33]

Is this issue here that it would be a wide if he bowled down the legs (but outside of off stump) is that what the confusion is about?

As a former grade umpire I'm honestly perplexed by this.

If it was me umpiring, I'd tell the batsmen he's being a bit stupid and take it a bit of both ways

No ball if it pitches off the pitch
Good delivery even if it's outside the lines if the batsmen is standing out there
Good delivery if it's behind yhe legs but on or outside the off stump
Wide if it's down past leg stump

The way I interpret it when umpiring is the leg side wide doesn't move in this scenario, so if you choose to shuffle around the crease, you only extend the areas where the bowler can legally bowl. Same if the batsman backs a foot outside leg, the ball must pass where he stepped to, even if he resumes his normal stance. I don't know if that's right by the law, but that's how I call it!

 

[DrVanNostrand]

All that did was reaffirm my opinion of Andrew Ellis being an appalling cricketer.

 

[FlowersByIrene]

The way I interpret it when umpiring is the leg side wide doesn't move in this scenario, so if you choose to shuffle around the crease, you only extend the areas where the bowler can legally bowl. Same if the batsman backs a foot outside leg, the ball must pass where he stepped to, even if he resumes his normal stance. I don't know if that's right by the law, but that's how I call it!

That's my thinking as well.


Why didn't the bowler hit the stumps though?

 

[Kram]

Test matches are still great

and T20 is silly but enjoyable


so I don't see the issue

But it's something new and different and I'm scared

 

[Marklar_33]

That's my thinking as well.


Why didn't the bowler hit the stumps though?

Cause he's an idiot! It is written into the laws that no ball that travels between stumps and batsman can be called wide

 

[ioppolo]

What a heckin' tool.

 

[Carbine Chaos]

It's pretty clear that the bowler is pushing it across and not bowling it at the stumps because he's got a short fine leg and no more protection in that area. I can see his logic. Having said that, the batsman is going across far enough that it would have been worth bowling a straight yorker for sure.