• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Cricket Q&A

roobarb

Cricket Spectator
Law 39 (Stumped)
1. Out Stumped
(a) The striker is out Stumped if
(i) he is out of his ground
and (ii) he is receiving a ball which is not a No ball
and (iii) he is not attempting a run
and (iv) his wicket is fairly put down by the wicket-keeper without the intervention of another member of the fielding side. Note Law 40.3 (Position of wicket-keeper).

(b) The striker is out Stumped if all the conditions of (a) above are satisfied, even though a decision of Run out would be justified.

2. Ball rebounding from wicket-keeper's person
(a) If the wicket is put down by the ball, it shall be regarded as having been put down by the wicket-keeper if the ball
(i) rebounds on to the stumps from any part of his person or equipment, other than a protective helmet
or (ii) has been kicked or thrown on to the stumps by the wicket-keeper.

(b) If the ball touches a helmet worn by the wicket-keeper, the ball is still in play but the striker shall not be out Stumped. He will, however, be liable to be Run out in these circumstances if there is subsequent contact between the ball and any member of the fielding side. Note, however, 3 below.

3. Not out Stumped
(a) If the striker is not out Stumped, he is liable to be out Run out if the conditions of Law 38 (Run out) apply, except as set out in (b) below.

(b) The striker shall not be out Run out if he is out of his ground, not attempting a run, and his wicket is fairly put down by the wicket-keeper without the intervention of another member of the fielding side, if No ball has been called.

© Marylebone Cricket Club 2003



Fairly clear from the laws that a stumping can only be effected by the wicketkeeper with no intervention by a fielder.
 

roobarb

Cricket Spectator
However, as no run has been attempted that'd suggest it can't be run out.
Again no. If a batsman knocked a ball to silly mid off and overbalanced, and then had his stumps put down he would be "run out".
 

SJS

Hall of Fame Member
Some people appear to be assuming that the batsman has to be attempting a run to be run out. Thats not correct.

If a batsman is caught out of his crease with the ball still in play he will be run out. Thats why a few batsmen have been run out at the bowlers end while casually 'going for a walk' within centimeters of the crease, while the ball was in play.
 

Perm

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Again no. If a batsman knocked a ball to silly mid off and overbalanced, and then had his stumps put down he would be "run out".
Ricky Ponting did it during the Ashes, Ian Bell was the batsman I think.
 

PhoenixFire

International Coach
Person A is on strike, and Person B is at the non strikers end. The bowler delivers the ball to Person A, and Person A hits it mid-off. Person B runs and rugby tackles (or obstructs them in any other sort of way) mid-off. Person A is given out 'Obstructing the field'. Is this a correct desicion?
 

Jamee999

Hall of Fame Member
Person B is out, surely.

I have a question of my own actually, that Sam has reminded me of:

The batsman is Zidaned (tm) by the fielder at short leg. What happens?

And the reverse:

A fieldsman is Zidaned (tm) by a (helmetless) batsman. What happens?
 

roobarb

Cricket Spectator
Person B is out for sure. just realised I created an unnecessary thread in my " umpiring dilemmas" thread. Can it be merged here mods?
 

roobarb

Cricket Spectator
Did it myself... anyway...


Interesting umnpiring dilemmas from the Observer. Not too tricky, but fun to think about...


1) A batsman hits the ball straight down the wicket. The bowler attempts a catch, but only succeeds in deflecting the ball. At the other end the non-striker, out of his ground, suddenly realises the ball will hit his wicket and run him out, so he instinctively sticks out his bat.


He connects and the ball bounces off and goes to the boundary.


What is your decision?




2)A Btasman arrives at the wicket with the handle of the bat almost twice the standard thickness. There are at least 5 additional wraprounds. The keeper calls it to you attention and insists it is now an illegal power weapon. What is your decision?



3) A bouncer hits the top of the batsman's helmet and the ball goes straight up , hig into the air.As it drops the batsman, unsettled by the blow , promptly hits the dropping ball over the the boundary. Is it a six?
 

Jamee999

Hall of Fame Member
1) Out obstructing the field. Or maybe dead ball.
2) Instruct the batsman to have a replacement brought out.
3) Yes
 

roobarb

Cricket Spectator
The batsman is Zidaned (tm) by the fielder at short leg. What happens?

This would come under the Law of a fielder obstructing a batsman. Five penalty runs and a warning. Pretty cr*p.


5. Deliberate distraction or obstruction of batsman
In addition to 4 above, it is unfair for any member of the fielding side, by word or action, wilfully to attempt to distract or to obstruct either batsman after the striker has received the ball.
(a) It is for either one of the umpires to decide whether any distraction or obstruction is wilful or not.

(b) If either umpire considers that a member of the fielding side has wilfully caused or attempted to cause such a distraction or obstruction he shall
(i) immediately call and signal Dead ball.
(ii) inform the captain of the fielding side and the other umpire of the reason for the call.
Additionally,
(iii) neither batsman shall be dismissed from that delivery.
(iv) 5 penalty runs shall be awarded to the batting side. See 17 below. In this instance, the run in progress shall be scored, whether or not the batsmen had crossed at the instant of the call. See Law 18.11 (Runs scored when ball becomes dead).
(v) the umpire at the bowler's end shall inform the captain of the fielding side of the reason for this action and, as soon as practicable, inform the captain of the batting side.
(vi) the ball shall not count as one of the over
(vii) the batsmen at the wicket shall decide which of them is to face the next delivery
(viii) the umpires shall report the occurrence as soon as possible to the Executive of the fielding side and any Governing Body responsible for the match, who shall take such action as is considered appropriate against the captain and player or players concerned.






A fieldsman is Zidaned (tm) by a (helmetless) batsman. What happens?

If the batsman did so in stopping the fielder from effecting a catch or stopping the ball he would be "out, obstructing the field". Otherwise there would be no on field penalty and he would be subject to the authorities of his governing body off field. The umpires would take issue with the captain and report the incident. Nothing in the Laws though.
 

Sanz

Hall of Fame Member
[IMO]
1.4 runs, I dont think non-striker can be out obstructing the ball.
2. Allow It, Nothing illegal
3. No, only allow byes/overthrows off it
[/IMO]
 

roobarb

Cricket Spectator
1) Out obstructing the field. Or maybe dead ball.
2) Instruct the batsman to have a replacement brought out.
3) Yes

1) Depends. Why?
2) Wrong.
3) No. Why? What if the fielding side appeals?
 

Jamee999

Hall of Fame Member
Surely on 3 it would be like if the ball hit your pad, but went onto your bat, and went for runs? A fielder's helmet makes it dead, but not a batsman's.
 

roobarb

Cricket Spectator
1.4 runs, I dont think non-striker can be out obstructing the ball.
2. Allow It, Nothing illegal
3. No, only allow byes/overthrows off it
1) Nope.
2) yup.
3) Nope.
 

sideshowtim

Banned
Person A is on strike, and Person B is at the non strikers end. The bowler delivers the ball to Person A, and Person A hits it mid-off. Person B runs and rugby tackles (or obstructs them in any other sort of way) mid-off. Person A is given out 'Obstructing the field'. Is this a correct desicion?
Yes, that's the right decision. I believe Person A is out regardless of them not being involved in the situation. I remember them talking about a scenario where something similair to that happened and saying the law concludes that the striker is out if such an obstruction occurs.. So Person A would be very, very angry with Person B in the changerooms afterwards, yet Person B would more than likely still get a reprimand.
 

roobarb

Cricket Spectator
Yes, that's the right decision. I believe Person A is out regardless of them not being involved in the situation. I remember them talking about a scenario where something similair to that happened and saying the law concludes that the striker is out if such an obstruction occurs.. So Person A would be very, very angry with Person B in the changerooms afterwards, yet Person B would more than likely still get a reprimand.

And you would be wrong....


Law 37 (Obstructing the field)
1. Out Obstructing the field
Either batsman is out Obstructing the field if he wilfully obstructs or distracts the opposing side by word or action. It shall be regarded as obstruction if either batsman wilfully, and without the consent of the fielding side, strikes the ball with his bat or person, other than a hand not holding the bat, after the ball has touched a fielder. See 4 below.

2. Accidental obstruction
It is for either umpire to decide whether any obstruction or distraction is wilful or not. He shall consult the other umpire if he has any doubt.

3. Obstructing a ball from being caught
The striker is out should wilful obstruction or distraction by either batsman prevent a catch being made.
This shall apply even though the striker causes the obstruction in lawfully guarding his wicket under the provisions of Law 34.3 (Ball lawfully struck more than once
 
Last edited:

roobarb

Cricket Spectator
A fielder's helmet makes it dead, but not a batsman's.

The ball is not "dead" after contacting a fielder's helmet (unless it is on the ground), it is just that a catch is not valid off a fielder's helmet. The ball is very much "live" in all senses having hit the batsman's helmet.
 

sideshowtim

Banned
3. Obstructing a ball from being caught
The striker is out should wilful obstruction or distraction by either batsman prevent a catch being made.
This shall apply even though the striker causes the obstruction in lawfully guarding his wicket under the provisions of Law 34.3 (Ball lawfully struck more than once

This is the law I'm talking about. If the non-striker tackles the fielder to stop him from making the catch, then the striker is out in this instance yes?
 

Top