New law to come into Cricket next year

scotch

Striker
i reckon when they have their next rules meeting etc..
That if a fielder throws the ball in from the outfield and it hits a batsman, umpire or cricket bat that the ball becomes dead from that moment.

Incredibly harsh on new Zealand as it was a cracking Throw today ;)
 


i reckon when they have their next rules meeting etc..
That if a fielder throws the ball in from the outfield and it hits a batsman, umpire or cricket bat that the ball becomes dead from that moment.

Incredibly harsh on new Zealand as it was a cracking Throw today ;)

There is an unwritten rule that you don’t benefit from a rebound by running but when it goes for 4 it has to stand. It happens so rarely I doubt it will get changed.
 
i reckon when they have their next rules meeting etc..
That if a fielder throws the ball in from the outfield and it hits a batsman, umpire or cricket bat that the ball becomes dead from that moment.

That would also mean that if it came off the bat and deflected into the stumps while the batsman might not have made his ground then he would be not out as the ball would be dead on hitting the bat.

That would be harsh on the fielding side.
 
There is an unwritten rule that you don’t benefit from a rebound by running but when it goes for 4 it has to stand. It happens so rarely I doubt it will get changed.

So when I was playing inter-form cricket at school and I turned and ran for an extra run after the ball hit my bat when someone had a shy at the stumps I was wrong to do so?
 
So when I was playing inter-form cricket at school and I turned and ran for an extra run after the ball hit my bat when someone had a shy at the stumps I was wrong to do so?
I think at kids level you don't really know any better, but if it happened against me in a game, I'd be furious.
 
I think at kids level you don't really know any better, but if it happened against me in a game, I'd be furious.

It was accidental as I wasn't even looking at the fielder but I was running on the same side of the wicket that the ball was fielded from so I realised there was a chance I'd get between the stumps and the ball.
 
It was accidental as I wasn't even looking at the fielder but I was running on the same side of the wicket that the ball was fielded from so I realised there was a chance I'd get between the stumps and the ball.

I look at it in the same vein as leg byes. If you can run when you can’t connect bat to ball and it hits your body, you can run when you deflect a throw.
 
So when I was playing inter-form cricket at school and I turned and ran for an extra run after the ball hit my bat when someone had a shy at the stumps I was wrong to do so?
Kids cricket I would say you were probably ok.

Adults cricket very much a no no and against “the spirit of the game”.
 
if a fielder throws the ball in from the outfield and it hits a batsman, umpire or cricket bat that the ball becomes dead from that moment.

How about the batsman is tagged out like in baseball?

Just kidding, it's a lousy idea as it would make chucking the ball at a batsman or umpire a viable run prevention tactic.
 
I remember Athers saying how he managed to infuriate the Australians when the ball hit him (or his bat) and he ran an extra run.
 
That would also mean that if it came off the bat and deflected into the stumps while the batsman might not have made his ground then he would be not out as the ball would be dead on hitting the bat.

That would be harsh on the fielding side.
Why, when the throw was going to be inaccurate in the first place?

So you can just aim for the umpire to prevent an extra run - much bigger target than the stumps.

Just kidding, it's a lousy idea as it would make chucking the ball at a batsman or umpire a viable run prevention tactic.
Why wouldn't you just throw at the fielder/keeper next to the stumps rather than the almost impossible task of deliberately hitting a moving object? You would imagine the run in progress would be counting anyway.
 
Last edited:
Why, when the throw was going to be inaccurate in the first place?




Why wouldn't you just throw at the fielder/keeper next to the stumps rather than the almost impossible task of deliberately hitting a moving object? You would imagine the run in progress would be counting anyway.

Depends on the situation. Square leg could simply bounce the ball off the umpire to stop a straight forward run he has little chance of running out. That could be pretty useful in limited overs cricket.

There's nothing wrong with the current rules. The fielding team need to take into account the batsmen when returning the ball. If they hit the batsman and the ball goes for overthrows, it's their own fault. Equally, if a batsman sticks out his hand or bat and deliberately blocks the ball, he's out obstructing the field.
 
Depends on the situation. Square leg could simply bounce the ball off the umpire to stop a straight forward run he has little chance of running out. That could be pretty useful in limited overs cricket.

There's nothing wrong with the current rules. The fielding team need to take into account the batsmen when returning the ball. If they hit the batsman and the ball goes for overthrows, it's their own fault. Equally, if a batsman sticks out his hand or bat and deliberately blocks the ball, he's out obstructing the field.
I would think the new dead ball rule would only rule out any further runs rather than nullify ones already completed or crossed. And it would be pretty obvious anyway if a fielder did that deliberately rather than the accident with Stokes.

If the players already do it by convention you might as well put it in the rules to keep everybody straight.
 
Last edited:

Back
Top