Cricketing Queries

[ferg512]

Ok this is a pretty random thought, probably been brought up before but isn't overthrows from a direct hit that isn't out the most stupidest rule in cricket?? It seems really ridiculous to me, you hit the stumps but because it gets a bad deflection you get punished.

 

[MUFC1987]

But if a batsman drills the ball back along the ground, it flicks the bowlers foot and hits the stumps, before running off down to long off, is he not getting punished for a bad deflection, because you're saying that he wouldn't be able to run, when it's pure luck on the bowlers part?

 

[Sureshot]

The amount of times fielders throw when the batsman will clearly be in his ground is stupid.

It's a risk, sometimes you benefit from throwing, others you don't.

 

[ferg512]

But if a batsman drills the ball back along the ground, it flicks the bowlers foot and hits the stumps, before running off down to long off, is he not getting punished for a bad deflection, because you're saying that he wouldn't be able to run, when it's pure luck on the bowlers part?

I never actually thought of it like that, good point.

 

[pcfan123]

Anyone here versed on the history of the LBW law?

has it always been what it currently is? with the stipulations that it may not pitch outside the line of leg stump.

was there ever a time when you could be lbw even if the ball pitched outside the leg stump? I really don't care for that rule, it just encourages padding and helps the already favored batsman.

 

[sami ullah khan]

^Suppose a legspinner or left arm orthodox comes over the wicket to a right hander. Bowler will have very high probability of hitting the batsmen on his pads in front of the stumps. This would marginalize batsmen's chances too much imo.

 

[pcfan123]

tough cookies I say

 

[sami ullah khan]

Also Ashley Giles would be the world's leading wicket taker if pitching outside leg rule is taken out

 

[ZoraxDoom]

I think Sureshot may be more qualified to comment on this, but as I remember, it started with being out if it pitched either side. But then spinners would exploit that, so it became that you could only be out LBW if it pitched and hit in line with the stumps.

Then came Sonny Ramdhin and Alf Valentine, and some batsman in England kept padding up to them when they pitched outside off, and neutralized their threat. So after that, the law was changed so that you can be given out if it pitches outside off and you don't play a shot.

 

[sohum]

So after that, the law was changed so that you can be given out if it pitches outside off and you don't play a shot.

The current rule says nothing about the ball pitching outside off. The rule is that you can't be given out if it hits you outside the line of off-stump when you are attempting a shot.

 

[pcfan123]

but the rule does say it can't pitch outside of leg at all. I think it should be allowed to pitch outside leg provided it hits you in line with leg stump. Same as the offside rule

 

[MUFC1987]

That would be a leg spinners dream, pitch it miles outside leg, wait for it to turn in and as long as it's brushing off stump it's out. That's crazy and gives bowlers way too much opportunity to bowl negatively and give the batsman no chance. There's a reason why no one really complains about the concepts of the LBW law and that's because it's as good as it possibly can be, to offer an even balance between bat and ball.

 

[AndyRAC]

I think being stumped off wide isn't fair - can't work out why that is allowed.
Another one is after taking a wicket - usually a catch - you can run the non striker out. We actually used to do it when we were kids in the park. (Also known as a double-play)

 

[Themer]

It would still need to hit them in line and be going onto the stumps which is bloody hard for a leggy to do from that sort of angle.

 

[ZoraxDoom]

Logically speaking, it's easier for a batsman to hit a ball pitching miles outside off than to hit one pitching miles outside leg. So in the first case you can give it out because the batsman had a chance to play it, but in the second case it's quite difficult and therefore unfair.

The current rule says nothing about the ball pitching outside off. The rule is that you can't be given out if it hits you outside the line of off-stump when you are attempting a shot.

Sorry, got it mixed up. Replace pitching outside off with hitting outside off in that post and it should make sense

But I think it did start with being given out if it pitched outside leg, but that was exploited so it was changed. Remember reading something about that...time to do some research.