Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 22

Thread: Is there anything in the rules

  1. #1
    International Regular NasserFan207's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Essex
    Posts
    3,873

    Is there anything in the rules

    -against having the wicketkeeper (while wearing gloves) standing anywhere you want?

    Say a 20/20 scenario where a boundary is needed of the final ball, and the wicketkeeper stands right on the boundary in the backstop position for the scoop shot. Is this illegal? Is there a rule preventing moving the keeper around?

  2. #2
    Cricketer Of The Year zaremba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Burgess Hill
    Posts
    8,967
    Law 40.1:

    The wicket-keeper is the only member of the fielding side permitted to wear gloves and external leg guards. If he does so, these are to be regarded as part of his person for the purposes of Law 41.2 (Fielding the ball). If by his actions and positioning it is apparent to the umpires that he will not be able to discharge his duties as a wicket-keeper, he shall forfeit this right and also the right to be recognised as a wicket-keeper for the purposes of Laws 32.3 (A fair catch), 39 (Stumped), 41.1 (Protective equipment), 41.5 (Limitation of on side fielders) and 41.6 (Fielders not to encroach on the pitch).

  3. #3
    International Regular NasserFan207's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Essex
    Posts
    3,873
    So its the umpire's call basically? Sounds like something you could find loopholes in. I could see them messing around with it in 20/20s at some stage.

  4. #4
    Cricket Web: All-Time Legend andyc's Avatar
    Yeti Sports 1.5 Champion!
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Canberra
    Posts
    23,853
    Quote Originally Posted by Irish_Opener View Post
    -against having the wicketkeeper (while wearing gloves) standing anywhere you want?

    Say a 20/20 scenario where a boundary is needed of the final ball, and the wicketkeeper stands right on the boundary in the backstop position for the scoop shot. Is this illegal? Is there a rule preventing moving the keeper around?
    If the keeper's going to be standing at say, silly mid off wearing his gloves, there might be a bit of an issue, but if he's just standing all the way back on the boundary I can't see much wrong with it. Maybe he's just expecting the bowler to bowl a really, really quick one.
    Quote Originally Posted by flibbertyjibber View Post
    Only a bunch of convicts having been beaten 3-0 and gone 9 tests without a win and won just 1 in 11 against England could go into the home series saying they will win. England will win in Australia again this winter as they are a better side which they have shown this summer. 3-0 doesn't lie girls.


  5. #5
    Cricketer Of The Year zaremba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Burgess Hill
    Posts
    8,967
    Quote Originally Posted by andyc View Post
    If the keeper's going to be standing at say, silly mid off wearing his gloves, there might be a bit of an issue, but if he's just standing all the way back on the boundary I can't see much wrong with it. Maybe he's just expecting the bowler to bowl a really, really quick one.
    Whatever you might describe as "the duties of the wicketkeeper", I doubt they can be discharged by a chap standing on the boundary.

  6. #6
    International Regular NasserFan207's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Essex
    Posts
    3,873
    But like he says, theoretically the bowler could just be really, really fast. The keeper has no fixed position behind the stumps from what I see. Obviously he isn't there for a traditional caught behind, but with things so heavily weighted in favour of the bat, it could be an interesting x-factor in 20/20s. I can't imagine any other format where you'd use it.

  7. #7
    International 12th Man
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    1,613
    That was actually a pretty good question, lol.

  8. #8
    Cricketer Of The Year zaremba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Burgess Hill
    Posts
    8,967
    Quote Originally Posted by Irish_Opener View Post
    But like he says, theoretically the bowler could just be really, really fast. The keeper has no fixed position behind the stumps from what I see. Obviously he isn't there for a traditional caught behind, but with things so heavily weighted in favour of the bat, it could be an interesting x-factor in 20/20s. I can't imagine any other format where you'd use it.
    I suppose the first requirement is that he's standing in line with the pitch.

    If the bowler were exceptionally quick and the boundary exceptionally small then you could just about imagine him standing near the boundary. But that would be exceptional and the umpire's call in light of the particular circumstances.

    Seems to me though that as a bare minimum, in order to discharge your duties as a keeper, you have to be positioned so as to have a reasonable chance of catching an edge and of saving a single if the batsman leaves the ball.

  9. #9
    Hall of Fame Member NUFAN's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Marrickville
    Posts
    18,029
    Z, that last sentence of yours is interesting, I don't see why it's considered reasonable to save a single when in T20 cricket a run a ball is not considered good for the batting team. I think that as long as the keeper is wearing pads and he is behind the stumps the keeper should be allowed to stand as far back as he likes.

  10. #10
    Cricketer Of The Year zaremba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Burgess Hill
    Posts
    8,967
    Yeah that's true. What I'm grappling with is the expression in Law 40.1 "discharge his duties as a wicket-keeper". I'm not sure if that's defined anywhere else in the Laws. But it surely can't be enough for the skipper to say "I want his duties to be to patrol the boundary and/or save the 2". Ultimately I suppose if I were the umpire I'd be inclined to say that if you're a wicket keeper, your job title suggests that your duties require that you be reasonably close to the wicket.

    I should add that Law 40.3 provides:

    3. Position of wicket-keeper
    The wicket-keeper shall remain wholly behind the wicket at the striker's end from the moment the ball comes into play until
    (a) a ball delivered by the bowler
    either (i) touches the bat or person of the striker
    or (ii) passes the wicket at the striker's end
    or (b) the striker attempts a run.
    In the event of the wicket-keeper contravening this Law, the umpire at the striker's end shall call and signal No ball as soon as possible after the delivery of the ball.

    It is arguable that this wouldn't in itself prevent you from standing at deep square leg, 6 inches behind square. But if you're fielding there you're not able to discharge your duties as wicket-keeper and therefore by Law 40.1 you can't have the special rights afforded to keepers (including wearing gloves).
    Last edited by zaremba; 20-03-2010 at 08:28 AM.

  11. #11
    Cricketer Of The Year zaremba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Burgess Hill
    Posts
    8,967
    And remember, if you're a keeper standing on the boundary, you can't walk in.

    Law 40.4 provides:

    4. Movement by wicket-keeper
    It is unfair if the wicket-keeper standing back makes a significant movement towards the wicket after the ball comes into play and before it reaches the striker. In the event of such unfair movement by the wicket-keeper, either umpire shall call and signal Dead ball. It will not be considered a significant movement if the wicket-keeper moves a few paces forward for a slower delivery.

  12. #12
    Hall of Fame Member Goughy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    All Over
    Posts
    15,083
    Quote Originally Posted by Irish_Opener View Post
    So its the umpire's call basically? Sounds like something you could find loopholes in. I could see them messing around with it in 20/20s at some stage.
    One way to do it is not to have a keeper. Ive done it in sixes tournaments. Have noone with the gloves or pads and 5 fielders.
    Last edited by Goughy; 20-03-2010 at 08:42 AM.
    If I only just posted the above post, please wait 5 mins before replying as there is bound to be edits

    West Robham Rabid Wolves Caedere lemma quod eat lemma

    Happy Birthday! (easier than using Birthday threads)

    Email and MSN- Goughy at cricketmail dot net

  13. #13
    Hall of Fame Member NUFAN's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Marrickville
    Posts
    18,029
    Quote Originally Posted by zaremba View Post

    It is arguable that this wouldn't in itself prevent you from standing at deep square leg, 6 inches behind square. But if you're fielding there you're not able to discharge your duties as wicket-keeper and therefore by Law 40.1 you can't have the special rights afforded to keepers (including wearing gloves).
    Yep. I wouldn't accept it if I were an umpire if the keeper was an inch behind square leg. If he's on the boundary behind the stumps or even a fraction leg or offside in a stationary position (rule 40.4) and you have someone like Dilshan on strike needing 3 runs off the last ball to win the match, it's a valid tactic by the fielding team IMO.

    All sorts of mayhem could happen with a fielder having to run to the stumps and try and get a run out though.

  14. #14
    Cricket Web Staff Member stumpski's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Medway valley
    Posts
    5,773
    It sounds as if you could have an ungloved, unpadded 'keeper on the boundary then, as long as you still had the four fielders in the circle, or whatever limit applies. Of course, the fielding circle only came in because of an England match in Australia when everyone, including the late David Bairstow, was 'on the ropes.'

  15. #15
    Cricketer Of The Year zaremba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Burgess Hill
    Posts
    8,967
    Quote Originally Posted by stumpski View Post
    It sounds as if you could have an ungloved, unpadded 'keeper on the boundary then, as long as you still had the four fielders in the circle, or whatever limit applies. Of course, the fielding circle only came in because of an England match in Australia when everyone, including the late David Bairstow, was 'on the ropes.'
    Not sure if the fielding restrictions include the keeper. But an ungloved, unpadded keeper on the boundary basically isn't a keeper and as Goughy points out there's nothing in the Laws (as far as I know) that requires you to have a keeper.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast


Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. New Rules Gentlemen New Rules. . .
    By SJS in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 31
    Last Post: 28-12-2009, 02:47 AM
  2. Is against the rules...
    By Howzatone in forum Ashes 2009
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 17-07-2009, 03:26 PM
  3. What rules do you play?
    By jonny1408 in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 03-07-2009, 12:43 PM
  4. Cricket Web Forum Rules
    By James in forum Cricket Web Forum Announcements
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 11-08-2007, 08:54 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •