Official, confirmed, verified "You are the umpire" thread

[qpeedore]

Next round.

1. A close Test match is being played in a brand new venue.Unfortunately the outfield more closely resembles a minefield. Several fielders have gone off with injuries while running around, such that even the substitute fielders have had to be substituted. As another fielder limps away, the fielding captain states that he no longer has any fielders left, except for his coach, who has retired only the year prior. He asks you if the coach can be used as a substitute fielder. What do you tell him?

2. A sticky-hands fielder has just held onto a near-impossible catch. He dives forward and does a roll, getting onto his feet and starts to run to celebrate. As he takes his first step, however, the ball pops out of his hand and falls to the turd. The batsman refuses to move. What is your call? (Saw something similar happen to the great Brian Lara while he was fielding in the slips many years ago.)

3. A bowler starting his spell delivers a beamer to the batsman, who just barely manages to duck out of the way. You give your first and only warning to the fielding captain and the bowler. The tall muscular bowler scoffs at ypu stating, "If I knock his head off I don't care. I just need one more ball to take him out. I'll send him to the morgue next ball."
What now?

4. In a tight finish, you are the standing umpire. The batsman takes a quick single. The stumps are broken at the striker's end. You are convinced that he is out despite you not having as good a view as your square leg colleague, who is convinced he is in. The two of you confer, and disagree. He refuses to take it to the third umpire, stating that he is certain the batsman is in his ground. You agree that he had a much better view than you did, but you are still unsure. (Admittedly this one is TOO easy.)

5. A fielder on the boundary sees a ball hit in his direction. He runs around and collects and throws. The wicketkeeper dives and collects the ball, in the process he knocks away the spare fielder's helmet. The ball would definitely have hit the helmet if undisturbed, but the keeper did make a legitimate attempt to field the ball. The batsman protests. What do you do?

6. In a Test match with the first day rained out without a ball bowled, the team batting second falls short of the opposition score by 160 runs. The captain of the team batting first says that they have to follow on as this has now become a 4 day match. Do you allow the follow on? (this one was in the book!)

7. A batsman, known to be weak against short deliveries, gets a bouncer and is caught at short fine leg. He protests, stating that there should not be more than two fielders behind leg at any time. The fielder states he was at square leg at the time the ball was delivered, and walked in as the bowler ran in. Your colleague at square leg states that he might have been behind square when the ball left the hand.
What is your call?

 

[_Sam_]

Not too sure how well I'll do but I'll give it a go .

1) Quite sure Hampshire used Dale Benkenstein (coach) as a substitute fielder this year in county cricket, not too sure if it would be allowed at international level though. I'll go with yes.

2) Depends if he was judged to have control over the ball or not, as he started to celebrate I would presume he did so out.

3) Quite sure he can be taken off,

4) Quite sure the square leg umpire gets the final say but am worried I will become embarrassed as you said it is so easy .

5) I personally think there would be no penalty runs given.

6) I think it still follows the rules for a 5 day match.

7) Third umpire check/no ball? Similar case to the Morgan one with too many fielders out the ring.

Not too sure how well I did at all, probably failed them all .

 

[qpeedore]

Maybe not. Stay tuned for the answers! And please submit your own scenarios!

If this thread becomes me replying to myself I AM NOT LETTING IT DIE.

 

[ethybubs]

falls to the turd

I would feel the need to raise this with the curator.

 

[qpeedore]

Would ANYONE want this thread revived? Say...I give five more scenarios?

If I get even ONE person to say yes, then yes it is.

Prize for the next round is my own copy of the book, mailed to any location in the world. The book is nowhere near mint condition, mind you.

I may or may not offer CPL tickets as prizes also...but you will be responsible for your airfare and accommodation...I would just give match tickets...but...that all depends huh?

 

[IanG]

Yes.I enjoyed it

 

[CerealKiller]

Yes.

 

[Gaurav_7]

Good to have you back. Yes.

 

[qpeedore]

Thank you for the support, guys. It's really appreciated.

Before the new scenarios, the answers from the last scenarios last year.

A close Test match is being played in a brand new venue.Unfortunately the outfield more closely resembles a minefield. Several fielders have gone off with injuries while running around, such that even the substitute fielders have had to be substituted. As another fielder limps away, the fielding captain states that he no longer has any fielders left, except for his coach, who has retired only the year prior. He asks you if the coach can be used as a substitute fielder. What do you tell him?

Once there are no objections from the other team, then yes, it's allowed. There have been some stories of substitute fielders even coming from the opposing team at times at lower levels. Say Team A has run out of substitutes. Team B offers them a guy. So the third string Team B guy is now fielding for Team A! (Goodness knows the drama if he takes a catch or effectsa runout...)

A sticky-hands fielder has just held onto a near-impossible catch. He dives forward and does a roll, getting onto his feet and starts to run to celebrate. As he takes his first step, however, the ball pops out of his hand and falls to the TURF. The batsman refuses to move. What is your call? (Saw something similar happen to the great Brian Lara while he was fielding in the slips many years ago.)

A catch is deemed complete once two things are fulfilled. One...the player must be in control of his body. Two...the player must be in control of the ball. In this situation, the player is in control of his body, but not the ball. The batsman is not out. This is why you should hold onto a catch and stay still for a moment, however brief, before celebrating!

A bowler starting his spell delivers a beamer to the batsman, who just barely manages to duck out of the way. You give your first and only warning to the fielding captain and the bowler. The tall muscular bowler scoffs at you stating, "If I knock his head off I don't care. I just need one more ball to take him out. I'll send him to the morgue next ball."
What now?

If you believe that the bowler intends to deliberately bowl something to injure a batsman, then you can take him out of the attack. YOU are the umpire, not him.

In a tight finish, you are the standing umpire. The batsman takes a quick single. The stumps are broken at the striker's end. You are convinced that he is out despite you not having as good a view as your square leg colleague, who is convinced he is in. The two of you confer, and disagree. He refuses to take it to the third umpire, stating that he is certain the batsman is in his ground. You agree that he had a much better view than you did, but you are still unsure. (Admittedly this one is TOO easy.)

Calling for the third umpire/TV review is not a decision which needs to be agreed upon by both umpires. If any one of you sees the need to call, then call it is. Also, given the disagreement, it would be wise to check. He may be convinced, and may be proven correct, however the mere fact that the review is available should be enough for you to override him and call for it. (Also, mention the incident to the match referee after the game.)

A fielder on the boundary sees a ball hit in his direction. He runs around and collects and throws. The wicketkeeper dives and collects the ball, in the process he knocks away the spare fielder's helmet. The ball would definitely have hit the helmet if undisturbed, but the keeper did make a legitimate attempt to field the ball. The batsman protests. What do you do?

The helmet was disturbed during the course of regular play. It is only on the field as a convenience, not as a necessity. I would give five penalty runs. Other umpires may disagree.

In a Test match with the first day rained out without a ball bowled, the team batting second falls short of the opposition score by 160 runs. The captain of the team batting first says that they have to follow on as this has now become a 4 day match. Do you allow the follow on? (this one was in the book!)

Actually, if the first day has been rained out without a ball bowled, the match effectively become a 4-day match...ONCE THE TOSS HAS NOT HAPPENED YET. The follow on for a 4-day match is 150 runs, as is in all First Class matches.

A batsman, known to be weak against short deliveries, gets a bouncer and is caught at short fine leg. He protests, stating that there should not be more than two fielders behind leg at any time. The fielder states he was at square leg at the time the ball was delivered, and walked in as the bowler ran in. Your colleague at square leg states that he might have been behind square when the ball left the hand.
What is your call?

After the Bodyline series, having two fielders behind square on the leg side had become illegal. However this is only at the moment the ball is bowled. Fielders are allowed to walk in a few paces, providing that they do not distract the batsman, but they must be still from the moment of delivery. And if at the moment of delivery this fielder was in front of square, then the delivery is legal. If he ran back as soon as the batsman played the ball and caught it behind square...hard luck...out.

 

[Yash.]

Once there are no objections from the other team, then yes, it's allowed. There have been some stories of substitute fielders even coming from the opposing team at times at lower levels. Say Team A has run out of substitutes. Team B offers them a guy. So the third string Team B guy is now fielding for Team A! (Goodness knows the drama if he takes a catch or effectsa runout...)

That actually happenned in a Ind A vs Sa A match. Mandeep Singh fielded for SA a.
Guess who stood in for indisposed South Africa A players? India’s Mandeep Singh - Firstpost

 

[qpeedore]

One more week then I'm giving ten (count them ten) scenarios. Once at least 5 people reply, the winner gets the copy of the book, albeit not in the best of conditions.

 

[MuchMore]

After the Bodyline series, having two fielders behind square on the leg side had become illegal.

Small correction: Having MORE than 2 behind square on leg side is illegal. But, 2 is fine.

Ref: Law 41 (The fielder) (point 5)

 

[qpeedore]

First of all, to answer the very true point made by MuchMore, he is VERY MuchMore correct. More than two fielders behind leg is not allowed. Not more than one. Typo on my part. (Although in Tests, the last 2015 revision to that particular Law can be taken how you will. See the MCC website for details..."Law changes 2015 explained.")

This set is going to mostly focus on what the umpire CAN or CANNOT do.

Also, note that for most of these scenarios I've listed in this thread, I myself have had to research the correct answer. I just like to think up ridiculous things. This post though, since my book is gonna go...I've researched...lol.

- In a one-day match (same ball used at both ends), the field is wet and the ball has taken a beating from the batsmen. You call for a replacement before 20 overs are up. Unfortunately none of the replacement balls look in similar condition. They are either way too new or way too old. There is no way that the match can continue with the current ball. What do you do? (Rudi Koertzen, while one of my favourite umpires EVER...was faced with just such a scenario and made a decision that...well...it WAS technically okay...but I did not agree with it...)

- Batsman A and B are at the wicket with 5 overs to go and 8 wickets down in a limited overs match. They are both tail enders and they require some 60-odd runs to win the match and the series (which is currently tied at 2-2). Batsman C, one of the team's stars, has retired hurt earlier and by all reports, is fit to return at the fall of the next wicket. He has a reputation for massive hitting and given similar situations in the past, has proven himself to be more than capable of scoring that much that quickly. Batsmen A and B, while they may get the odd boundary, are in no way scoring near the required asking rate so far. Batsman A clearly gets a yorker that hits pad-first flush in front of the stumps. Nobody appeals. The next ball, batsman A gets a clear nick to the wicketkeeper, who takes it cleanly. Again, nobody appeals. In the next over (run rate now nearing 20) you see a top edge skied that no fielder makes any attempt to catch. Can you intervene?

- The old ball is 80 overs old but is reverse swinging all over the place. The light is good and the seamers are fresh. Naturally, the bowling team declines the offer of the new ball, as while they have not taken a wicket as yet, the batsmen are both clearly troubled to cope with the swing. Things move along, with the movement not letting up. At 105 overs, the bowling team still refuses to take the new ball. You request a change of the old ball with one of comparable wear and tear, and choose an appropriate one. But the batsmen are just as much in trouble. While the bowling is not overtly dangerous as such, there is still a significant risk to the batsmen in your opinion. You state as such to both your colleague and the fielding captain. The captain still refuses to take the new ball. What now?

- A batsman hits the ball into the outfield, where it trickles to a stop. Before the fielder can reach it, however, a dog runs across and grabs the ball and takes it clear across the boundary. That standing batsmen, in between fits of laughter, ask for a four. Is it? (TOO easy...I have to give ONE at least that people can get correct.)

- SORRY IF THIS ONE TRIGGERS/CAUSES ANY ISSUES!
A high-tension match between two rivals is being played. You are the third umpire, thanking the Creator for your time in the box for finally not being out on the field. The standing batsman misses a ball, and you lean back to relax some more until, at the end of the over, one of the television producers asks that you listen to a replay. The replay is that of the same ball that the batsman had missed, where the wicketkeeper clearly addresses the batsman and says more than one racist statement to him, heard via the stump mic. The batsman laughs it off, and the wicketkeeper seems to be laughing as well. No further statements along those lines are said up until that point, and the batsman does not seem to hold any animosity to the keeper. Your two standing colleagues and neither of the other fielders seem to have heard the exchange. In fact, it can almost seem as if it was a joke between the batsman and the keeper. It looks like a joke, as they hug at the end of the over. Can you do anything?

- The batsman skies the ball. A fielder runs under it and manages to get his hands onto it, but has to juggle. In the process, the ball hits his chin and runs down under his jersey and between the jersey and his body, whereupon he grabs it and pulls it out at his waist. They appeal. Is it out?

- The last ball before the drinks break is a peach of a delivery, beating the outside edge by the slimmest of margins. During the break, the replays begin showing on the big screen in the ground and the batsman actually seems to have hit it with a very fine edge, which was collected by the wicketkeeper. As the bowler stands at his mark to begin the next over, the fielding captain walks up to you and calmly asks you, "How's that?" The ball in particular is very much dead and has been for about two minutes. What is your response?

- A wicketkeeper is standing up to the stumps for a medium pace bowler. The ball spits out of a rough patch on the pitch and heads straight for the batsmans's neck area. He initially tries to get on top of the bounce but pulls away at the last minute, realising the extreme bounce. The motion causes him to stumble out of his crease. The wicketkeeper collects and breaks the stumps and appeals for stumped. Is he?

- The batsman hits a ball from a spinner, which goes into the air. The wicketkeeper is closest to it and calls for the catch. The batsman, off-balance, swipes his leg at the ball, thinking that even if the catch was dropped, the ball would have hit the stumps and knocked the bails off and as such he would be protecting his stumps. The batsman does not hit the wicketkeeper in any way, neither does his attempt stop the potential catch from being taken. The ball falls through the keeper's gloves but the stumps remain undisturbed. He appeals, saying that the batsman's leg swipe distracted him. Do you give the batsman out for obstruction?

- A bowler refuses to take a run-up, instead just bowling the ball from the crease with one stride (and being the slowest ball you have ever seen). The batsman steps nearly halfway up the pitch but misses, and the wicketkeeper calmly takes the bails off. Is he out stumped given there was no preparation for a run-up?

 

[CerealKiller]

- Batsman A and B are at the wicket with 5 overs to go and 8 wickets down in a limited overs match. They are both tail enders and they require some 60-odd runs to win the match and the series (which is currently tied at 2-2). Batsman C, one of the team's stars, has retired hurt earlier and by all reports, is fit to return at the fall of the next wicket. He has a reputation for massive hitting and given similar situations in the past, has proven himself to be more than capable of scoring that much that quickly. Batsmen A and B, while they may get the odd boundary, are in no way scoring near the required asking rate so far. Batsman A clearly gets a yorker that hits pad-first flush in front of the stumps. Nobody appeals. The next ball, batsman A gets a clear nick to the wicketkeeper, who takes it cleanly. Again, nobody appeals. In the next over (run rate now nearing 20) you see a top edge skied that no fielder makes any attempt to catch. Can you intervene?

I don't think the umpire can intervene, but the players could receive a visit from the match referee.

- The old ball is 80 overs old but is reverse swinging all over the place. The light is good and the seamers are fresh. Naturally, the bowling team declines the offer of the new ball, as while they have not taken a wicket as yet, the batsmen are both clearly troubled to cope with the swing. Things move along, with the movement not letting up. At 105 overs, the bowling team still refuses to take the new ball. You request a change of the old ball with one of comparable wear and tear, and choose an appropriate one. But the batsmen are just as much in trouble. While the bowling is not overtly dangerous as such, there is still a significant risk to the batsmen in your opinion. You state as such to both your colleague and the fielding captain. The captain still refuses to take the new ball. What now?

If the umpire thinks that continuing to use the bowl would be risky for the batsmen, he can replace it. But i don't think he can force a team to take the new ball.

- A batsman hits the ball into the outfield, where it trickles to a stop. Before the fielder can reach it, however, a dog runs across and grabs the ball and takes it clear across the boundary. That standing batsmen, in between fits of laughter, ask for a four. Is it?

Dead ball.

A high-tension match between two rivals is being played. You are the third umpire, thanking the Creator for your time in the box for finally not being out on the field. The standing batsman misses a ball, and you lean back to relax some more until, at the end of the over, one of the television producers asks that you listen to a replay. The replay is that of the same ball that the batsman had missed, where the wicketkeeper clearly addresses the batsman and says more than one racist statement to him, heard via the stump mic. The batsman laughs it off, and the wicketkeeper seems to be laughing as well. No further statements along those lines are said up until that point, and the batsman does not seem to hold any animosity to the keeper. Your two standing colleagues and neither of the other fielders seem to have heard the exchange. In fact, it can almost seem as if it was a joke between the batsman and the keeper. It looks like a joke, as they hug at the end of the over. Can you do anything?

If the batsman doesn't have any issues with it, i don't think the umpire should intervene, but racist insults are a serious thing, so i think the umpire can warn the keeper.

- The batsman skies the ball. A fielder runs under it and manages to get his hands onto it, but has to juggle. In the process, the ball hits his chin and runs down under his jersey and between the jersey and his body, whereupon he grabs it and pulls it out at his waist. They appeal. Is it out?

Dead ball.

- The last ball before the drinks break is a peach of a delivery, beating the outside edge by the slimmest of margins. During the break, the replays begin showing on the big screen in the ground and the batsman actually seems to have hit it with a very fine edge, which was collected by the wicketkeeper. As the bowler stands at his mark to begin the next over, the fielding captain walks up to you and calmly asks you, "How's that?" The ball in particular is very much dead and has been for about two minutes. What is your response?

If the fielding team didn't appeal before the ball was dead, then i don't think you can give it out. A similar incident happened in a recent ODI between Australia and New Zealand, although the batsman was given out.

- A wicketkeeper is standing up to the stumps for a medium pace bowler. The ball spits out of a rough patch on the pitch and heads straight for the batsmans's neck area. He initially tries to get on top of the bounce but pulls away at the last minute, realising the extreme bounce. The motion causes him to stumble out of his crease. The wicketkeeper collects and breaks the stumps and appeals for stumped. Is he?

Yes.

- The batsman hits a ball from a spinner, which goes into the air. The wicketkeeper is closest to it and calls for the catch. The batsman, off-balance, swipes his leg at the ball, thinking that even if the catch was dropped, the ball would have hit the stumps and knocked the bails off and as such he would be protecting his stumps. The batsman does not hit the wicketkeeper in any way, neither does his attempt stop the potential catch from being taken. The ball falls through the keeper's gloves but the stumps remain undisturbed. He appeals, saying that the batsman's leg swipe distracted him. Do you give the batsman out for obstruction?

I think you could go either way, depending on what the square leg umpire thinks of the "swipe".

- A bowler refuses to take a run-up, instead just bowling the ball from the crease with one stride (and being the slowest ball you have ever seen). The batsman steps nearly halfway up the pitch but misses, and the wicketkeeper calmly takes the bails off. Is he out stumped given there was no preparation for a run-up?

If the bowl hasn't bounced more than twice, then he is out.

 

[IceAgeComing]

- In a one-day match (same ball used at both ends), the field is wet and the ball has taken a beating from the batsmen. You call for a replacement before 20 overs are up. Unfortunately none of the replacement balls look in similar condition. They are either way too new or way too old. There is no way that the match can continue with the current ball. What do you do? (Rudi Koertzen, while one of my favourite umpires EVER...was faced with just such a scenario and made a decision that...well...it WAS technically okay...but I did not agree with it...)

My understanding is that you'd try to pick the one that's closest to the condition of the previous ball; and that since you are the umpire its your choice which ball it is. Perhaps there's something I'm missing though...

- Batsman A and B are at the wicket with 5 overs to go and 8 wickets down in a limited overs match. They are both tail enders and they require some 60-odd runs to win the match and the series (which is currently tied at 2-2). Batsman C, one of the team's stars, has retired hurt earlier and by all reports, is fit to return at the fall of the next wicket. He has a reputation for massive hitting and given similar situations in the past, has proven himself to be more than capable of scoring that much that quickly. Batsmen A and B, while they may get the odd boundary, are in no way scoring near the required asking rate so far. Batsman A clearly gets a yorker that hits pad-first flush in front of the stumps. Nobody appeals. The next ball, batsman A gets a clear nick to the wicketkeeper, who takes it cleanly. Again, nobody appeals. In the next over (run rate now nearing 20) you see a top edge skied that no fielder makes any attempt to catch. Can you intervene?

If I was the batting team in this situation I'd have no problem with retiring one of my batsmen if the other team were playing silly buggers like this, or walking after the catch behind. As an umpire you couldn't do anything; although I'd probably report the bowling team for doing what they did since its hardly in the spirit of the thing.

- The old ball is 80 overs old but is reverse swinging all over the place. The light is good and the seamers are fresh. Naturally, the bowling team declines the offer of the new ball, as while they have not taken a wicket as yet, the batsmen are both clearly troubled to cope with the swing. Things move along, with the movement not letting up. At 105 overs, the bowling team still refuses to take the new ball. You request a change of the old ball with one of comparable wear and tear, and choose an appropriate one. But the batsmen are just as much in trouble. While the bowling is not overtly dangerous as such, there is still a significant risk to the batsmen in your opinion. You state as such to both your colleague and the fielding captain. The captain still refuses to take the new ball. What now?

You can't force the new ball; however if you felt that the ball was causing dangerous conditions for the batsman then you could switch it for another one of the same condition, again. It'd probably lead to things being farcical; but if the same things kept happening after two ball switches then there's really nothing else that you could do provided that other factors (the light for example) were OK.

- A batsman hits the ball into the outfield, where it trickles to a stop. Before the fielder can reach it, however, a dog runs across and grabs the ball and takes it clear across the boundary. That standing batsmen, in between fits of laughter, ask for a four. Is it? (TOO easy...I have to give ONE at least that people can get correct.)

Dead ball: and this actually once happened in a uni game I played in

A high-tension match between two rivals is being played. You are the third umpire, thanking the Creator for your time in the box for finally not being out on the field. The standing batsman misses a ball, and you lean back to relax some more until, at the end of the over, one of the television producers asks that you listen to a replay. The replay is that of the same ball that the batsman had missed, where the wicketkeeper clearly addresses the batsman and says more than one racist statement to him, heard via the stump mic. The batsman laughs it off, and the wicketkeeper seems to be laughing as well. No further statements along those lines are said up until that point, and the batsman does not seem to hold any animosity to the keeper. Your two standing colleagues and neither of the other fielders seem to have heard the exchange. In fact, it can almost seem as if it was a joke between the batsman and the keeper. It looks like a joke, as they hug at the end of the over. Can you do anything?

I'd imagine that you'd have a word with the batsman and the keeper after the game; just to check whether the former was offended and to tell the latter that everything that he says is potentially audible on the TV and to maybe moderate his language in the future. If the batsman didn't like what was said and only reacted on the field the way he did because he didn't know what else to do, then you report the keeper.

- The batsman skies the ball. A fielder runs under it and manages to get his hands onto it, but has to juggle. In the process, the ball hits his chin and runs down under his jersey and between the jersey and his body, whereupon he grabs it and pulls it out at his waist. They appeal. Is it out?

Provided it naturally managed to make its way down there then its out: if he somehow managed to intentionally guide the ball down there then its penalty runs as it'd be the same as trying to use your cap to catch the ball.

- The last ball before the drinks break is a peach of a delivery, beating the outside edge by the slimmest of margins. During the break, the replays begin showing on the big screen in the ground and the batsman actually seems to have hit it with a very fine edge, which was collected by the wicketkeeper. As the bowler stands at his mark to begin the next over, the fielding captain walks up to you and calmly asks you, "How's that?" The ball in particular is very much dead and has been for about two minutes. What is your response?

Its not out; you can't use the big screen in the ground to influence your decision since then it wouldn't be fair: since not all deliveries are shown on the big screen straight away.

- A wicketkeeper is standing up to the stumps for a medium pace bowler. The ball spits out of a rough patch on the pitch and heads straight for the batsmans's neck area. He initially tries to get on top of the bounce but pulls away at the last minute, realising the extreme bounce. The motion causes him to stumble out of his crease. The wicketkeeper collects and breaks the stumps and appeals for stumped. Is he?

That's out provided that it wasn't a no ball for bowling too many short balls. Even if it was a wide for going over the batsman's head it'd still be out if the keeper somehow caught it and took the bails off, since you can be out stumped off a wide.

- The batsman hits a ball from a spinner, which goes into the air. The wicketkeeper is closest to it and calls for the catch. The batsman, off-balance, swipes his leg at the ball, thinking that even if the catch was dropped, the ball would have hit the stumps and knocked the bails off and as such he would be protecting his stumps. The batsman does not hit the wicketkeeper in any way, neither does his attempt stop the potential catch from being taken. The ball falls through the keeper's gloves but the stumps remain undisturbed. He appeals, saying that the batsman's leg swipe distracted him. Do you give the batsman out for obstruction?

If he's trying to protect his wicket I don't see how that's obstruction, you couldn't give it out unless it was very obvious that the ball was never going to hit the stumps. Its one of those benefit of the doubt thing; and you always have to lean towards the batting side for those.

- A bowler refuses to take a run-up, instead just bowling the ball from the crease with one stride (and being the slowest ball you have ever seen). The batsman steps nearly halfway up the pitch but misses, and the wicketkeeper calmly takes the bails off. Is he out stumped given there was no preparation for a run-up?

Provided that the ball didn't bounce more than twice, then he's out stumped, if it did bounce more than twice its a no ball. There's no law that mandates that you have to run-up (or walk-up for that matter) to bowl, its just that most bowlers probably need to in order to get the ball down the wicket in a legal manner.