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

[Sherlock Holmes]

Probably there’s no way of a batsman scoring runs without facing a ball

Apparently

 

[Yash.]

However @qpeedore only knows whther it is true or not

 

[qpeedore]

Runs scored and wickets taken during Super Overs don't count as part of a player's overall stats. A bit of a trick question, to be honest.

 

[Yash.]

Runs scored and wickets taken during Super Overs don't count as part of a player's overall stats. A bit of a trick question, to be honest.

-_-

 

[Sherlock Holmes]

Runs scored and wickets taken during Super Overs don't count as part of a player's overall stats. A bit of a trick question, to be honest.

but he did OFFICIALLY face the ball as super overs are counted for the match

so you got tangled in your own set of constraints :P

 

[qpeedore]

No, he didn't officially face anything. Since it's just to determine the outcome, he "officially" faced those balls, and "officially" scored those runs, but as for stats, it doesn't matter.

Now, it's different for a bowler as for the original question. He can get a batsman stumped off of a wide off of the first ball of his over, the ball isn't counted to him. So his figures read 0.0 overs, 1 run, 1 wicket. (Technically average 0, strike rate infinity).

 

[qpeedore]

...Parth D is going to be the Batman to my Joker...I look forward to this.

 

[Yash.]

No, he didn't officially face anything. Since it's just to determine the outcome, he "officially" faced those balls, and "officially" scored those runs, but as for stats, it doesn't matter.

Now, it's different for a bowler as for the original question. He can get a batsman stumped off of a wide off of the first ball of his over, the ball isn't counted to him. So his figures read 0.0 overs, 1 run, 1 wicket. (Technically average 0, strike rate infinity).

Virat Kohli did that thing IRL. He took his first career wicket off a wide ball

 

[NILAYSHAH60]

Virat Kohli did that thing IRL. He took his first career wicket off a wide ball

And that too KP

 

[qpeedore]

This is another one of those subjective questions that I really could not find an official answer for. Just to give a little backstory first.

According to the Laws (19.8), if a boundary results from the wilful act of a fielder, then the runs scored shall be, first of all any penalty runs, then the runs scored for the boundary, then the runs completed including the one in progress if the batsmen had crossed. So, example...

An established batsman is on strike for ball 6 of an over. He hits the ball into the outfield and jogs a single so he will be on strike for the start of the next over. The fielder realises this and despite the ball not having enough momentum to take it to the rope, the fielder kicks/slides/pushes it into the ropes himself.

Now, first of all, this can and does constitute unfair play, so it is up to the discretion of the umpire to give 5 penalty runs to the batting team. Even if the umpire didn't give the 5 runs, the act by the fielder was definitely deliberate, so the boundary counts. Plus the one run that they were running/had already run. So the sum total could be either 5+4+1 = 10 (only 5 awarded to the batsman though), or just 4+1 = 5. Either way, the established batsman is on strike for the new over.

These days, umpires are supposed to take a very harsh stance on what constitutes unfair play, though, so 10 total runs would more than likely result, with meetings with the match referee and the player/s involved happening after the day's play and whatnot.

That's not in any question. That's well-catered for in the Laws and Rules and Conditions.

My question is, what happens if it wasn't wilful?

Let's say a fielder slides and collects a ball. Forget about who the batsmen are, they just jog through for a couple and show no intent of anything else. The fielder slides, collects. The ball has absolutely definitely stopped moving toward the boundary. There is absolutely no pressure on the fielder, he is in control of the ball by your opinion, and it looks it would be like a normal return to the keeper. The fielder is winding up to throw, but then the ball slips from his grasp and touches the rope (for four). Clearly there was no intent. What is it? Those two runs are now four? Four overthrows in addition to the first two? Dead ball?

I'd love to get your opinions on this. I have mine, but not saying yet.

Second question, since a lot of people, even cricketers and some umpires can seem to get this right. Yes, everyone who knows cricket knows that if both bails are off, in order to run out or stump a batsman you must pull or strike a stump out of the ground. How exactly do you do it?

Leaving you with a couple or a few "did you knows".

Did you know...

- That if a particular player/s on the fielding side has been confirmed by the umpires to have altered the condition of the ball, that the batsman at the wicket is allowed to choose a new ball from a selection of six at various degrees of usage, including a brand new ball? If it is not possible at the time to identify the player/s responsible, then the umpires shall choose a ball of similar condition prior to the change.

- That if the umpires have determined that the fielding team has deliberately tried to "distract, deceive, or obstruct" (their words, not mine)...any of the batsmen after the striker has received the ball (one would assume the normal banter and gamesmanship is taken to be part of play)...well...here's the weird thing about it. The batsmen can decide who faces the next ball. So let's say you have a bowler deliberately trying to get said established batsman from the not-italic stuff above from getting onto strike and he's "run out". The umpires say that the bowler definitely got in his way. Forget penalty runs, forget match referee, the batsman can say "Hey I'm on strike now. Bye, guys."

- So I think that they have changed the rules on the tied Super Overs after the 2019 World Cup. Subsequent Super Overs are to be played, time restrictions are a thing, but get this. The original bowler can't bowl again. And if any batsmen were out, they can't bat again. This could potentially see an 11th Super Over bowled by your wicketkeeper to two tail enders. Hey, if Mark Boucher can have one Test wicket bowling...

 

[NILAYSHAH60]

Let's say a fielder slides and collects a ball. Forget about who the batsmen are, they just jog through for a couple and show no intent of anything else. The fielder slides, collects. The ball has absolutely definitely stopped moving toward the boundary. There is absolutely no pressure on the fielder, he is in control of the ball by your opinion, and it looks it would be like a normal return to the keeper. The fielder is winding up to throw, but then the ball slips from his grasp and touches the rope (for four). Clearly there was no intent. What is it? Those two runs are now four? Four overthrows in addition to the first two? Dead ball?

I'd love to get your opinions on this. I have min

I think this incident is quite common in Cricket. There is often pressure on the fielders when there is a close match or the fielder is less skilled or he just had a very bad day. I think this counts as a mis-field and not a deliberate attempt to let the ball go past the boundary. I think this was just an honest mistake on part of the fielder. Yesterday I saw a T20I match between South Africa and Pakistan at the Wanderers in late 2013 on YouTube, in that match Lonwabo Tsotsobe was trying to stop the ball from going into the boundary. In the attempt he dived along the ground the flick the ball back on to the field but he somehow fell over and the ball just hit hit leg and touched the boundary rope. Now this wasn't a deliberate attempt but a mistake by Tsotsobe. So I think such incident to get counted as a mis-field and only four runs should be allowed in this case.

Second question, since a lot of people, even cricketers and some umpires can seem to get this right. Yes, everyone who knows cricket knows that if both bails are off, in order to run out or stump a batsman you must pull or strike a stump out of the ground. How exactly do you do it?

I didn't get this one.

 

[qpeedore]

My case was that the fielder had definitely stopped the ball. IE, the ball has not been travelling toward the boundary, but is instead totally stopped and is in the fielder's hands.

 

[Sherlock Holmes]

Let's say a fielder slides and collects a ball. Forget about who the batsmen are, they just jog through for a couple and show no intent of anything else. The fielder slides, collects. The ball has absolutely definitely stopped moving toward the boundary. There is absolutely no pressure on the fielder, he is in control of the ball by your opinion, and it looks like a normal return to the keeper. The fielder is winding up to throw, but then the ball slips from his grasp and touches the rope (for four). Clearly there was no intent. What is it? Those two runs are now four? Four overthrows in addition to the first two? Dead ball?

Just a boundary as it wasn't deliberate so that mis-field was in the natural course of the game. Hence, just 4.

However, if its 9 wickets down and the batsmen come and object that fielder did it deliberately (even though he didn't), will will need to give the benefit of doubt to the batsman as bowling team has a risk of only couple more runs whereas the batting team has the risk of innings coming to an end.

Second question, since a lot of people, even cricketers and some umpires can seem to get this right. Yes, everyone who knows cricket knows that if both bails are off, in order to run out or stump a batsman you must pull or strike a stump out of the ground. How exactly do you do it?

Hold your fist around any of three stumps, touch the ball to the same stumps with the other hand, make contact with it and then pull out the stump completely out of the ground simultaneously.

 

[qpeedore]

@Parth D Give the members time to respond next time. But yes, you're correct on one and a half. If both the fielding side and both batsmen have jogged the double run and have figured that the play for that ball is over, then you can't give the boundary and thus you will signal dead ball. It's one of those weird things about balls being dead without being in the wicketkeeper's gloves that made me ask the question. If, however, play is alive because of that clause not being fulfilled, then anything that happens is to be taken into consideration.

One would think that the maximum penalty for something like this is 5 runs to the batting team, in addition etc etc as I said before. Match referee definitely, but if in your opinion the fielder messed up, then no penalty runs, it's four, play on. One would also wonder why I'm agreeing with ParthD...but that's because he's absolutely correct.

And to the second, you're correct as well. Essentially you need to both be touching both the ball and the stump at any one time sufficiently enough to remove it.

EDIT: People have said ball in one hand, pull stump with the other...that's not out. People have said pull stump out and then touch it to the ball...that's not out. The only way it's out is if the stump is pulled out while in contact with the ball.

 

[Ed Smith]

Second question, since a lot of people, even cricketers and some umpires can seem to get this right. Yes, everyone who knows cricket knows that if both bails are off, in order to run out or stump a batsman you must pull or strike a stump out of the ground. How exactly do you do it?

Leaving you with a couple or a few "did you knows".