Rule question | BigFooty

Rule question

Discussion in 'Cricket' started by eddiesmith, Dec 3, 2018.

?

Who is out?

  1. Striker

    92.3%
  2. Non striker

    7.7%
  1. eddiesmith

    eddiesmith Hall of Famer

    Collingwood
    Joined:
    Jul 04
    Posts:
    45,169
    Location:
    Junktion Oval
    Other Teams:
    England Cronulla
    Question for the big footy cricket board:

    Striker hits the ball to mid off, non striker who was backing up turns around, calls no and steps back into their crease. Striker yells yes yes yes and keeps coming despite non striker having their back turned and both batsmen end up at the one end, ball thrown to keeper who whips off the bails.

    Which batsman is out?
     

    (Log in to remove this ad.)

  2. Howard Littlejohn

    Howard Littlejohn Brownlow Medallist

    North Melbourne
    Joined:
    May 06
    Posts:
    12,958
    Location:
    Canberra
    I keep forgetting this one, but think as the batsmen have not crossed (they are level) the striker is out. Plus the non-striker is in his ground, it is the striker who is no longer in theirs.
     
    eddiesmith likes this.
  3. Spook

    Spook Norm Smith Medallist

    Hawthorn
    Joined:
    Aug 03
    Posts:
    7,032
    Location:
    Top of the pile looking down
    Other Teams:
    Claremont
    Yep you’re correct

    38.3 Which batsman is out

    The batsman out in the circumstances of 38.1 is the one whose ground is at the end where the wicket is put down. See Laws 25.6 (Dismissal and conduct of a batsman and his/her runner) and 30.2 (Which is a batsman’s ground).

    30.2 Which is a batsman’s ground

    30.2.1 If only one batsman is within a ground, it is his/her ground and will remain so even if he/she is later joined there by the other batsman.

    30.2.2 If both batsmen are in the same ground and one of them subsequently leaves it, the ground belongs to the batsman who remains in it.

    30.2.3 If there is no batsman in either ground, then each ground belongs to whichever batsman is nearer to it, or, if the batsmen are level, to whichever batsman was nearer to it immediately prior to their drawing level.

    30.2.4 If a ground belongs to one batsman then, unless there is a striker who has a runner, the other ground belongs to the other batsman, irrespective of his/her position.
     
    Monstersnag87 and eddiesmith like this.
  4. Belnakor

    Belnakor Brownlow Medallist

    Fremantle
    Joined:
    Apr 05
    Posts:
    17,892
    Location:
    Perth
    Heres where basically the exact scenario happens. In this case the nonstriker didn't get back into the crease quickly enough.

     
  5. eddiesmith

    eddiesmith Hall of Famer

    Collingwood
    Joined:
    Jul 04
    Posts:
    45,169
    Location:
    Junktion Oval
    Other Teams:
    England Cronulla
    Thanks all, confirmed what I and what I assumed 99.9% of people believe the rule is.

    Incredibly in this scenario, the non striker was given out by a premier level umpire because he had initially left his crease...
     
    The Swans Blog and Van_Dyke like this.
  6. Adelaide Hawk

    Adelaide Hawk Hall of Famer

    Hawthorn
    Joined:
    Sep 02
    Posts:
    44,341
    Location:
    Adelaide
    Other Teams:
    Norwood
    It's all about whether the batsmen cross in play or not.
     
  7. ioppolo

    ioppolo Brownlow Medallist

    West Coast
    Joined:
    Oct 10
    Posts:
    19,529
    Location:
    Perth
    Other Teams:
    Chelsea, OKC Thunder, Scorchers
    When I read the OP the Chanderpaul/Morton scenario immediately came to mind
     
  8. Spook

    Spook Norm Smith Medallist

    Hawthorn
    Joined:
    Aug 03
    Posts:
    7,032
    Location:
    Top of the pile looking down
    Other Teams:
    Claremont
    Read the full op mate. We are discussing a different scenario.
     
  9. Adelaide Hawk

    Adelaide Hawk Hall of Famer

    Hawthorn
    Joined:
    Sep 02
    Posts:
    44,341
    Location:
    Adelaide
    Other Teams:
    Norwood
    I did. If the batsmen haven't crossed, as pointed out in the op (perhaps you should read it again), then the striker is out. Problem?
     
  10. Spook

    Spook Norm Smith Medallist

    Hawthorn
    Joined:
    Aug 03
    Posts:
    7,032
    Location:
    Top of the pile looking down
    Other Teams:
    Claremont
    Read the OP again. One of the batsman never ran so how the f can they cross. This scenario has nothing to do about crossing.

    Then go and read the rules about whose “ground”
     
  11. Adelaide Hawk

    Adelaide Hawk Hall of Famer

    Hawthorn
    Joined:
    Sep 02
    Posts:
    44,341
    Location:
    Adelaide
    Other Teams:
    Norwood
    I can't make it any clearer. I'm saying the batsmen HAVEN'T crossed, therefore the striker is OUT. One of the more simple rules in cricket. The only mystery is why you are arguing.
     
    Hotdees and eddiesmith like this.

    (Log in to remove this ad.)

  12. Spook

    Spook Norm Smith Medallist

    Hawthorn
    Joined:
    Aug 03
    Posts:
    7,032
    Location:
    Top of the pile looking down
    Other Teams:
    Claremont
    I’ll say it again. It has nothing to do with crossing. The rules never say crossing. It’s about who is in their “ground”, go and read the “ground” rules.
    Eg. let’s say hey did cross then striker stopped, non striker turned and made it back to his ground at the non strikers end first then he was joined by the striker then the strikers end bails were broken, the striker is still out.
     
  13. Adelaide Hawk

    Adelaide Hawk Hall of Famer

    Hawthorn
    Joined:
    Sep 02
    Posts:
    44,341
    Location:
    Adelaide
    Other Teams:
    Norwood
    Comprehension is not your strong point is it?
     
  14. Spook

    Spook Norm Smith Medallist

    Hawthorn
    Joined:
    Aug 03
    Posts:
    7,032
    Location:
    Top of the pile looking down
    Other Teams:
    Claremont
    Really mate, you wouldn’t know because you don’t read, you are one of the most argumentative people on this forum. You can never say, oh I’ve read that rule know and yes you make sense. Instead you just argue like a wanker.
     
  15. Spook

    Spook Norm Smith Medallist

    Hawthorn
    Joined:
    Aug 03
    Posts:
    7,032
    Location:
    Top of the pile looking down
    Other Teams:
    Claremont
    In the OPs scenario the rule is a lot more complex than just the normal basic run out of if they have crossed or not in the normal scenario. As I’ve said, go and read the rules.
    If batsman have crossed is the simple anology in the normal scenario but go to the actual laws of cricket and tell me where the word “crossed” is used.
    https://www.lords.org/mcc/laws-of-cricket/run-out
     
    Last edited: Dec 6, 2018
  16. bumsonseats

    bumsonseats Premiership Player

    Hawthorn
    Joined:
    Oct 09
    Posts:
    3,433
    Location:
    1984 (Aka Adelaide....aka ass end of the world)
    As a former first grade cricket umpire in Adelaide and Sydney grade cricket comps, I feel that I am well qualified to settle this arguement.

    It’s pretty straight forward.......he (she) who gets to the ground first owns it.
    Therefore the other batsmen owns the ground at the other end.
    They can do a merry dance mid-pitch and cross 10 times, but ultimately the first to get to the ground owns it. So with reference to the scenario posed by the OP.....Spook is correct.

    However......I can see where Adelaide Hawk is coming from.....even if the laws of cricket don’t specifically reference crossing (as pointed out by Spook). If for instance neither batsman is within their ground at either end, then the batsman that is closest to each respective end owns that end. So I guess you could say that the striker is closer to the non-strikers wicket at the time the wicket at the strikers end is broken, then I guess you could say they have crossed.
    But ultimately, it is irrelevant if they have crossed or not.......he who gets there first, owns it.....or he who is closer to each end owns that end.

    The Laws of the game used to say that once the batsmen have crossed, then they can’t return back to their original end.....so no mid-pitch merry dance. The new law (law 30) is more simple in my opinion.
     
    Spook likes this.
  17. Sammo360

    Sammo360 Team Captain

    Sydney
    Joined:
    Aug 09
    Posts:
    554
    Here's a classic one albeit it was the striker who turned back and got back to his crease first

     
  18. eddiesmith

    eddiesmith Hall of Famer

    Collingwood
    Joined:
    Jul 04
    Posts:
    45,169
    Location:
    Junktion Oval
    Other Teams:
    England Cronulla
    IMO they got that one wrong, I think it looks like Katich actually then leaves his ground before the stumps were broken therefore he should be out?
     
  19. ioppolo

    ioppolo Brownlow Medallist

    West Coast
    Joined:
    Oct 10
    Posts:
    19,529
    Location:
    Perth
    Other Teams:
    Chelsea, OKC Thunder, Scorchers
    Nah Katich is safe there.
     
  20. The Swans Blog

    The Swans Blog Norm Smith Medallist

    Sydney
    Joined:
    Apr 13
    Posts:
    9,071
    Location:
    Melbourne
    Other Teams:
    The Swans Blog
    Batsman. They haven't crossed and the non-striker is in his crease when the batsman crosses it.
     
    eddiesmith likes this.
  21. The Swans Blog

    The Swans Blog Norm Smith Medallist

    Sydney
    Joined:
    Apr 13
    Posts:
    9,071
    Location:
    Melbourne
    Other Teams:
    The Swans Blog
    Once your foot is in, you're considered grounded
     
    eddiesmith likes this.
  22. eth-dog

    eth-dog Premium Platinum

    Essendon
    Joined:
    Jan 07
    Posts:
    70,347
    Location:
    Melbourne
    Other Teams:
    Coburg Lions, All Boston sides
    Whoever crosses the non-strikers crease first, which I would assume would be the non-striker
     
Back To Top

Share This Page