No Ball Recall

[Suma Magic]

Regarding the beer non-wicket yesterday.

Is the ball dead once caught, in the situation where it will be referred to check if it was a front foot no ball? Yesterday, was the ball dead as soon as Hilfy caught it?

If it is, that robs the batsman the chance of running through for a quick run even if caught.

If it's not a dead ball, then yesterday the Aussies could perhaps have run out KP, as he was out of his ground.

I can't find the details of this new law, would appreciate any links, I think it came in in October.

Apologies if this has been covered in another thread, if someone could tell me thread and page no. would be much appreciated.

 

[Suma Magic]

Re: New Ball Recall

Thread should read 'no ball recall' but don't know how to edit.

 

[Dragz]

Re: New Ball Recall

Interesting question.

According to Law 23, the Ball is dead when a batsman is dismissed. The ball is dead from the instant of the incident causing the dismissal.

The ball is also considered dead when the umpire thinks that the fielding team and batsmen don't regard it as being in play. Which would generally be the case with a rather obvious catch. We might just have to wait until a fielder throws stumps down from a catch to find out

Having said which, I was always told to run hard anyway, because the fielder might drop it and you don't want to be run out on a dropped catch.

 

[Jolldo87]

Re: New Ball Recall

KP wasn't attempting a run so he couldn't have been run out. However, if they were attempting a run then I see no reason why they couldn't have been dismissed run out.

 

[Suma Magic]

Re: New Ball Recall

Thanks for the info.

The way I understand the laws you've just pointed out:

- batsman is out: yesterday he was not out

- batsman and fielding team agree that ball is dead etc: yesterday all the Aussies would have had to do is throw the stumps down and state that did not consider the ball to be dead. Or does it have to be both batsman and fielding side, and not just fielding side as I've pointed out in that example?

Happy for corrections to my understanding and new information.

 

[legend166]

Re: New Ball Recall

Would go strongly against the spirit of the game if they ran someone out in that situation.

 

[Suma Magic]

Re: New Ball Recall

KP wasn't attempting a run so he couldn't have been run out. However, if they were attempting a run then I see no reason why they couldn't have been dismissed run out.

Yep think you're right there.

But in a situation where the fielder caught it and immediately through downs the stumps, the batsman was not trying to run but was out of his crease, and then the ball is later declared a front foot no ball is he then out?

And could they have scored a run yesterday?

 

[Suma Magic]

Re: New Ball Recall

Would go strongly against the spirit of the game if they ran someone out in that situation.

Yes spot on, but interested to know if they have made laws to ban it happening, and ban batsmen taking a run in this situation.

 

[Furn]

Re: New Ball Recall

you cant be run out if you think your out and are walking off. It doesnt matter who thinks the ball is in play. If your walking off because you think you are out you cant be run out.

The only way a run out could have happened yesterday is if the batsman tried to run. You can be runout from a dead ball though. IF you are trying to run.

For example if you are hit on the pad not playing a shot and then run. You can be runout, thats why the umps let them run and then call dead ball. The runs wont count and you have to go back but you can be runout. So a dead ball doesnt save you from being run out.

Had Eng tried to run during the review they could have been run out even though its a dead ball. The runs wouldnt have counted and why would you run when you cant keeps the runs.

 

[Jolldo87]

Re: New Ball Recall

Yep think you're right there.

But in a situation where the fielder caught it and immediately through downs the stumps, the batsman was not trying to run but was out of his crease, and then the ball is later declared a front foot no ball is he then out?

If it was immediate i'd assume it would be out. As long as the batsman doesn't give up and start walking off because he thinks he's been dismissed.

And could they have scored a run yesterday?

I'm pretty sure they could have. If they ran through while the ball was in the air the single would've counted along with the no-ball.

 

[Suma Magic]

Re: New Ball Recall

Thanks for the info.

My understanding now is that they can run, and can only be run out if attempting a run.

So if the batsman hits it up in the air, and starts to run, as this often happens, the bowler catches next to the stumps, the batsman, 3/4 the way down the track slows thinking he is out, but the bowler then whips off the bails with this new rule in the back of his mind, then the umpire refers and the bat is found to be not out from the catch. Is he out run out?

 

[Furn]

Re: New Ball Recall

Thanks for the info.

My understanding now is that they can run, and can only be run out if attempting a run.

So if the batsman hits it up in the air, and starts to run, as this often happens, the bowler catches next to the stumps, the batsman, 3/4 the way down the track slows thinking he is out, but the bowler then whips off the bails with this new rule in the back of his mind, then the umpire refers and the bat is found to be not out from the catch. Is he out run out?

lol, interesting scenario. I would think in that situation the umpire would have to decide why the batsman was out of his crease. If he was gonna make his ground and stopped thinking he was out then it shouldnt be out as he's out of his crease because he thought he out, even though he was running.If he was not gonna make it anyway or was still running he would be out.

Generally you shouldnt be run out if you are out of your crease because thought you were out. But its been gotten wrong before. Dean jones in the WI years ago is one example.

 

[skipper kelly]

Re: New Ball Recall

Spinners bowling no balls is just bad cricket.

 

[Father Jack]

Re: New Ball Recall

Dean Jones would be the expert on this subject.

 

[Partridge]

Re: New Ball Recall

Would go strongly against the spirit of the game if they ran someone out in that situation.

Pretty sure that was what happened with Dean Jones in the West Indies in 1991. Fairly certain that was illegal then too, except that neither the umpire nor either captain was aware of it.

 

[Furn]

Re: New Ball Recall

Pretty sure that was what happened with Dean Jones in the West Indies in 1991. Fairly certain that was illegal then too, except that neither the umpire nor either captain was aware of it.

Yeh the umps got that one wrong. I think by the time someone in the Aussie dressing room figured out the rule he was off the field so couldn't be recalled.

 

[legend166]

Re: New Ball Recall

You can be run out when not attempting a run. There's nothing in the rules saying otherwise. It happened in a one dayer between NZ and England with Collingwood (someone posted a video a couple weeks back). Basically it was the last ball of the over, the ball went through to the keeper, Collingwood left his crease to go talk to the non striker and the keeper hit the stumps. The umpires were going to give it out, but Vettori retracted the appeal because he's a class act.

I think in this situation the ball was clearly dead, though. But where there's debate, it's better for the bowling side to just let play continue. It'd be a cheap dismissal outside the spirit of the game.

 

[Partridge]

Re: New Ball Recall

Yeh the umps got that one wrong. I think by the time someone in the Aussie dressing room figured out the rule he was off the field so couldn't be recalled.

Yeah something like that. I've got a book about the series and I think one of the non-Simpson approved journos was the first to spot it.

It's amazing to think that the umpires aren't aware of the rules for the game they're paid to run.

 

[eddiesmith]

Re: New Ball Recall

Would go strongly against the spirit of the game if they ran someone out in that situation.

We have seen the current Aussie keeper run out a batsman who was gardening and the Kiwis ran out a batsman celebrating his team mates century, what is the spirit of cricket these days?

 

[Father Jack]

Re: New Ball Recall

Yeah something like that. I've got a book about the series and I think one of the non-Simpson approved journos was the first to spot it.

It's amazing to think that the umpires aren't aware of the rules for the game they're paid to run.

see the 2007 world cup final for a glaring example of a whole team of the bastards having absolutely no idea, even though the teams, the commentators, the spectators and the half-asleep viewers at home all knew that the game was finished and over.

 

[Jolldo87]

Re: New Ball Recall

You can be run out when not attempting a run. There's nothing in the rules saying otherwise.

In this instance, that is incorrect.

38.2. Batsman not Run out
Notwithstanding 1 above, a batman is not out Run out if
(a) he has been within his ground and has subsequently left it to avoid injury, when the wicket is put down.
Note also the provisions of Law 29.1(b) (When out of his ground)
(b) the ball has not subsequently been touched by a fielder, after the bowler has entered his delivery stride, before the wicket is put down.
(c) the ball, having been played by the striker, or having come off his person, directly strikes a protective helmet worn by a fielder and without further contact with him or any other fielder rebounds directly on to the wicket. However, the ball remains in play and either batsman may be Run out in the circumstances of 1 above if a wicket is subsequently put down.
(d) he is out Stumped. See Law 39.1(b) (Out Stumped).
(e) No ball has been called
and (i) he is out of his ground not attempting a run
and (ii) the wicket is fairly put down by the wicket-keeper without the intervention of another fielder.