-
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.
Pollard Wicket - Is it Deliberate or unintentional?
- Thread starter shyamcool
- Start date
Victor Ian
International Coach
Non issue. Pollard looked like he was dazed and confused before realising he was in the wrong place at the last second. He had already given up and was walking off. It just goes to show how far India's fielding has improved that he didn't stand his ground, back in the crease, expecting it to be dropped.
If Bumrah had dropped it, he would still have had plenty of time to run Pollard out.
If Bumrah had dropped it, he would still have had plenty of time to run Pollard out.
TheJediBrah
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Unintentional. He's just a dopey ****
SillyCowCorner1
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Any batsmen playing a shot like that would walk back to the pavilion with drooping shoulders.
Now this begs the question to be asked (a hypothetical). If the ball straight up in the air, and Pollard stood his ground, the ball then follows a trajectory that would land on the batsmen's head, would Bumrah push him away in order to get room to catch the ball?
Now this begs the question to be asked (a hypothetical). If the ball straight up in the air, and Pollard stood his ground, the ball then follows a trajectory that would land on the batsmen's head, would Bumrah push him away in order to get room to catch the ball?
SillyCowCorner1
Request Your Custom Title Now!
cnerd123
likes this
If he stood perfectly still and blocked a catch as a result he would be obstructing the field. It's common sense. The ball is in the air, everyone can see it, and you can see a fielder trying to get under it. No reason to stand your ground outside of wanting to block the catch. It's intentional, and it's cut and dry.
You all need to read the law:
https://www.lords.org/mcc/laws-of-cricket/laws/law-37-obstructing-the-field/
You all need to read the law:
https://www.lords.org/mcc/laws-of-cricket/laws/law-37-obstructing-the-field/
Victor Ian
International Coach
I dont
Starfighter
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
I'd like to think it was accidental but it's Pollard so anything goes.
Why does law 37.4 still exist. You still have to get consent to throw the ball back to the fielder/bowler even if there's no threat on your wicket? This #metoo movement is out of control.
StephenZA
Hall of Fame Member
Clarity.... otherwise what constitutes if it will/will not threaten the wickets? Clear line in sand, don't touch the ****ing ball without permission.
cnerd123
likes this
basically this
Starfighter
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
I never understood batsmen who threw the ball back to the opposition. Make the bastards move.
Spikey
Request Your Custom Title Now!
it's an unintentional action but obstructing the field doesn't have to be an intentional action does it? if you carelessly obstruct the fielder you're still obstructing the field. it's not like Pollard has top edged it into his helmet and is stumbling all over the place, he's just walking around with no regard to those around him, and if in his wandering he had prevented a wicket taking opportunity, he should be given out
Last edited:
