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

[qpeedore]

Alright, let's see...I do need new scenarios...since my last one was answered so quickly.

When is a no-ball NOT followed by a free hit in limited overs cricket?

Ah, I've got one...

You are one of the umpires in a domestic T20 competition. A batsman hits a ball which seems to be going for six, but suddenly a fielder appears out of nowhere and holds onto the ball just in front of the ropes. Seeing that his momentum will take him over, he attempts a relay catch/double catch by jumping over and in the process throwing the ball to a nearby teammate. The special effects staff on the ground, however, seem to have pushed their fireworks button a split second too early and in the process the fielder is distracted and lands with the ball outside of the ropes. He protests. What do you do?

(Long story short, guy goes to do a relay catch but the fireworks scare him.)

 

[Sherlock Holmes]

Alright, let's see...I do need new scenarios...since my last one was answered so quickly.

When is a no-ball NOT followed by a free hit in limited overs cricket?

Ah, I've got one...

You are one of the umpires in a domestic T20 competition. A batsman hits a ball which seems to be going for six, but suddenly a fielder appears out of nowhere and holds onto the ball just in front of the ropes. Seeing that his momentum will take him over, he attempts a relay catch/double catch by jumping over and in the process throwing the ball to a nearby teammate. The special effects staff on the ground, however, seem to have pushed their fireworks button a split second too early and in the process the fielder is distracted and lands with the ball outside of the ropes. He protests. What do you do?

(Long story short, guy goes to do a relay catch but the fireworks scare him.)

Call it a dead ball. Whenever there have been obstructions like these, its better to call the ball dead and that ball gets bowled again.

 

[asprin]

When is a no-ball NOT followed by a free hit in limited overs cricket?

Waist height no-ball?

You are one of the umpires in a domestic T20 competition. A batsman hits a ball which seems to be going for six, but suddenly a fielder appears out of nowhere and holds onto the ball just in front of the ropes. Seeing that his momentum will take him over, he attempts a relay catch/double catch by jumping over and in the process throwing the ball to a nearby teammate. The special effects staff on the ground, however, seem to have pushed their fireworks button a split second too early and in the process the fielder is distracted and lands with the ball outside of the ropes. He protests. What do you do?

As an umpire, pretty much nothing except convince the catcher to make do with an apology from the staff (which, in all likely, is what will happen instantly). Protesting won't be of much help as I don't think it can be called a dead ball.

Batting team will get those 6 runs since technically there wasn't a catch completed.

The catcher will have to suck it up since it was an honest mistake on part of the special effects team.

 

[qpeedore]

Call it a dead ball. Whenever there have been obstructions like these, its better to call the ball dead and that ball gets bowled again.

And suffer the wrath? By the way, I'm pretty sure I haven't seen you on this thread before. Welcome.

Waist height no-ball?


As an umpire, pretty much nothing except convince the catcher to make do with an apology from the staff (which, in all likely, is what will happen instantly). Protesting won't be of much help as I don't think it can be called a dead ball.

Batting team will get those 6 runs since technically there wasn't a catch completed.

The catcher will have to suck it up since it was an honest mistake on part of the special effects team.

That's what I would do. And ensure it doesn't happen again. Too many things would happen if I called dead ball and allowed it to be bowled over.

And no, waist height no balls are a free hit.

 

[Sherlock Holmes]

And suffer the wrath? By the way, I'm pretty sure I haven't seen you on this thread before. Welcome.

Thanks! Yes, I came here on PC after years.

Also, for No Ball scenario,

Opponent teams need 1 run to win and bowlers balls a no ball
Game is over and no free hit the next time the bowler bowls his first ball in next match

 

[qpeedore]

@PDZone neither.

This is one of those weird rules that is and is not specifically stated in the Laws but because it's not (and is) stated, you can't give it a free hit.

Limited overs matches is the important phrase.

Good try though!

EDIT: You're now @Parth D, sorry.

 

[Sherlock Holmes]

@PDZone neither.

EDIT: You're now @Parth D, sorry.

Indeed.

Anyway, still getting used to the forum environment. Long time.

 

[CerealKiller]

I don’t think there’s any no-ball that is not followed by a free hit?

 

[qpeedore]

Technically yes. The Laws state that every no ball is to be followed by a free hit. But in their definition of a no ball they forgot one thing that was stated further on. And technically it is a no ball but also technically it can't be a free hit.

The amount of fielders outside the restrictions is what I'm referring to. I don't have much time now to define and explain (on my phone) but I'll expand when I get home.

EDIT: Sorry to @DalePlaysCricket I don't think I've seen you on this thread either so welcome to you too.

 

[qpeedore]

So yes, if you have more fielders outside the circle than is allowed, it has to be called a no ball. It is the responsibility of the fielding captain, and not the umpires, to ensure that their field is set according to the Laws...well technically for limited overs matches the term is "Playing Conditions" and not Laws. The number of fielders in/out of the circle applies at the instant of delivery, so you can have fielders outside who then walk in to end up being legal by the time the ball is bowled. Usually it's the responsibility of the umpire at the striker's end (ie square leg umpire) to determine legality with respect to this rule.

Why isn't it followed by a free hit?

For one, you can't change the field for a free hit unless a new batsman is on strike. Since the initial field was illegal, this would negate that entire thing. For two, it isn't specifically listed under the "no ball" article in the Playing Conditions set out by the ICC...and it's weird because the no ball clause specifically references other clauses in its definition, including clauses about fielders. In fact, they specifically mention "a fielding restriction breach" just a few lines further along, yet they did not specifically mention why.

It's one of those "technically yes, but then again, technically no" sort of situations.

A funny thing about free hits. You can't change the field, but the bowler can change from over to around the wicket and vice versa.

 

[Sherlock Holmes]

So yes, if you have more fielders outside the circle than is allowed, it has to be called a no ball. It is the responsibility of the fielding captain, and not the umpires, to ensure that their field is set according to the Laws...well technically for limited overs matches the term is "Playing Conditions" and not Laws. The number of fielders in/out of the circle applies at the instant of delivery, so you can have fielders outside who then walk in to end up being legal by the time the ball is bowled. Usually it's the responsibility of the umpire at the striker's end (ie square leg umpire) to determine legality with respect to this rule.

Why isn't it followed by a free hit?

For one, you can't change the field for a free hit unless a new batsman is on strike. Since the initial field was illegal, this would negate that entire thing. For two, it isn't specifically listed under the "no ball" article in the Playing Conditions set out by the ICC...and it's weird because the no ball clause specifically references other clauses in its definition, including clauses about fielders. In fact, they specifically mention "a fielding restriction breach" just a few lines further along, yet they did not specifically mention why.

It's one of those "technically yes, but then again, technically no" sort of situations.

A funny thing about free hits. You can't change the field, but the bowler can change from over to around the wicket and vice versa.

Well I saw an instance of an ODI (don't remember the teams and series) where something like this happend.

There were 5 fielders outside the 30 yard circle instead of allowable limit of 4. The batsman or the non striker identified it immediately after the ball was bowled.

The umpire called it a no ball and gave a free hit. And one of the fields was asked to come inside the 30 yard circle. No other changes in the field was allowed.

 

[qpeedore]

I stand corrected in that case. I got it wrong.

 

[A.P Haux]

Now I have thought out an interesting one here. I'm not sure if it was posted here before or if the situation is logically flawed so apologies if that's the case. Here we go
Now in a t20 game with 2 balls left, the team chasing needs 5 runs with 8 wickets down. The bowler bowls a slower ball and the number 10 backs away into the crease and goes for an almighty swing, connecting the ball firmly and sending it all the way. You signal it as a six and the batsmen at the crease start celebrating the victory, but the fielding team is unmoved. The feilding captain approches you and claims the keeper noticed the number 10 backing away too much before playing the shot and his leg have hit the stumps and dislodged the bails, therefore the batsman is actually out hit wicket and the play should resume. You check the replay and that's indeed the case, but as it appeared that the batsman hit the ball and his leg dislodged the bails at the same time. After checking a few times you fail to confirm which happened first, and now both teams are waiting for your verdict. What would you do?

 

[CerealKiller]

Now I have thought out an interesting one here. I'm not sure if it was posted here before or if the situation is logically flawed so apologies if that's the case. Here we go
Now in a t20 game with 2 balls left, the team chasing needs 5 runs with 8 wickets down. The bowler bowls a slower ball and the number 10 backs away into the crease and goes for an almighty swing, connecting the ball firmly and sending it all the way. You signal it as a six and the batsmen at the crease start celebrating the victory, but the fielding team is unmoved. The feilding captain approches you and claims the keeper noticed the number 10 backing away too much before playing the shot and his leg have hit the stumps and dislodged the bails, therefore the batsman is actually out hit wicket and the play should resume. You check the replay and that's indeed the case, but as it appeared that the batsman hit the ball and his leg dislodged the bails at the same time. After checking a few times you fail to confirm which happened first, and now both teams are waiting for your verdict. What would you do?

If he dislodges the bails before the ball is dead, in this case before it's gone for six, then it's out, I think.

 

[Sherlock Holmes]

Now I have thought out an interesting one here. I'm not sure if it was posted here before or if the situation is logically flawed so apologies if that's the case. Here we go
Now in a t20 game with 2 balls left, the team chasing needs 5 runs with 8 wickets down. The bowler bowls a slower ball and the number 10 backs away into the crease and goes for an almighty swing, connecting the ball firmly and sending it all the way. You signal it as a six and the batsmen at the crease start celebrating the victory, but the fielding team is unmoved. The feilding captain approches you and claims the keeper noticed the number 10 backing away too much before playing the shot and his leg have hit the stumps and dislodged the bails, therefore the batsman is actually out hit wicket and the play should resume. You check the replay and that's indeed the case, but as it appeared that the batsman hit the ball and his leg dislodged the bails at the same time. After checking a few times you fail to confirm which happened first, and now both teams are waiting for your verdict. What would you do?

if he didnt complete the shot or just completed the shot when the bails were dislodged, the batsman is out