The Joys of Decision-making: A Play in Three Acts
Law 36 (Leg before wicket)
1. Out LBW
The striker is out LBW in the circumstances set out below.
(a)The bowler delivers a ball, not being a No ball
and (b) the ball, if it is not intercepted full pitch, pitches in line between wicket and wicket or on the off side of the striker's wicket
and (c) the ball not having previously touched his bat, the striker intercepts the ball, either full pitch or after pitching, with any part of his person
and (d) the point of impact, even if above the level of the bails
either (i) is between wicket and wicket
or (ii) is either between wicket and wicket or outside the line of the off stump, if the striker has made no genuine attempt to play the ball with his bat
and (e) but for the interception, the ball would have hit the wicket.
2. Interception of the ball
(a) In assessing points (c), (d) and (e) in 1 above, only the first interception is to be considered.
(b) In assessing point (e) in 1 above, it is to be assumed that the path of the ball before interception would have continued after interception, irrespective of whether the ball might have pitched subsequently or not.
3. Off side of wicket
The off side of the striker's wicket shall be determined by the striker's stance at the moment the ball comes into play for that delivery.
The UMPIRE: In the lower grades an umpire is never really an umpire but a fellow player of the batting side. While some (mostly bowlers), not particular bothered by the ostracism of aggrieved team-mates, like to give batsmen out LBW, the majority are as conservative as Dicky Bird in his hey-day. Our protagonist gives them but rarely, is well versed in the laws, and can count to six. Despite middling eyesight, mistakes are rare.
The CAPTAIN: The opposition captain is about 35, bulky in a way only lower grade cricketers of middle years can be, still with hair, and surprisingly, without a Boony moustache. He fields at mid-off to the right-handers.
The MID-WICKET: Short mid-wicket is reserved for either very good fieldsman or insane psychopaths. Ours is of the latter variety, in his 40s, and prone to the Jekyll and Hyde approach to sportsmanship, being a nice enough bloke off the field and a right dickhead on it. After suffering each outburst, our umpire can retire to square-leg to hear what a complete arse he is from his team-mates, but not before.
The BOWLER: Our bowler is about 17, sharp-ish, bowling right-arm over the wicket and swinging it in both directions. Having not played at the club for long he is probably still a nice kid.
[The SCENE: a suburban cricket ground surrounded by tall gum-trees. A pleasant day, not too warm with the odd cloud. The grass is green for this time of year but otherwise it is a Saturday afternoon typical of any that occur in Melbourne over summer.
The BOWLER has just taken a wicket, and is bowling to the new BATSMAN: a left-hander. The UMPIRE is new to the field, having replaced a player in need of pads. The bowled ball pitches outside well outside leg and is glanced very fine for a single. The FIELDSMEN appeal for LBW.]
UMPIRE: Not Out.
MID-WICKET: He didn't play a shot at that! Dead ball.
[The UMPIRE - slightly unsurely doesn't signal leg byes]
MID-WICKET: He didn't play a shot.
UMPIRE: Given I've signaled runs I'm pretty sure he played a shot.
UMPIRE: I reckon he hit it.
MID_WICKET: Fucking hell.
UMPIRE: [to LH BATSMAN, quietly] Did you hit that?
LH BATSMAN: Not sure.
UMPIRE: Sounded like it anyway.
[The BOWLER bowls to a Right-Handed Batsman, the non-striker in Act 1. The ball swings in, hitting the batsman on the full on middle and leg. Despite the trajectory of the ball taking it well down the leg-side there is a large appeal.]
UMPIRE: Not Out.
MID-WICKET [ironically, given they'd previously given not out some of the plumbest LBWs in the history of the sport]: Don't even bother appealing, he isn't going to give anything.
CAPTAIN [apparently having picked up the tiniest of knowledge from the television, but not understanding it fully; or perhaps worse, understanding precisely what the commentator meant despite said commentator being wrong]: What? It hit him on the full. That's Out.
UMPIRE [turning]: No it isn't. Learn the rules.
CAPTAIN: When it hits him on the full the ball goes straight on. That's out.
UMPIRE: Yes, straight on in the line the ball was travelling. It was going down the leg-side so it is not out.
CAPTAIN: You're a fucking disgrace.
[The UMPIRE turns back while the BOWLER bowls the next ball without incident.]
UMPIRE: Over [hands the BOWLER his cap] Despite what your captain thinks, the ball was going well down leg.
CAPTAIN: Don't listen to him, he has no idea.
[Bowling again to the Left-Handed batsman again, the BOWLER gets the ball to swing back into the batsman's pads. It hits him in line with leg-stump, and was going on to hit middle; however having pitched well outside leg stump it is not out. The FIELDSMEN appeal anyway]
UMPIRE: Not Out.
MID-WICKET [angrily]: What was it missing?
UMPIRE: It pitched outside leg.
MID-WICKET [still angry]: How can that not be out? It was hitting middle!
UMPIRE: Yes, it was going to hit the stumps, but it pitched well outside leg, so it is not out.
MID-WICKET: It's fucking out, you're a fucking disgrace.
UMPIRE: Mate, you can call me a disgrace when you learn the rules. In the meantime it is not out.
MID-WICKET [muttering]: Fuck off.
Cricket - Articles
13th February, 2006 19:43:35
[#] [5 comments]
Ratings - February/March 2006
Pakistan v India
Opening Ratings: Pak: 1127.04 Ind: 1175.00
1st Test: Drawn
2nd Test: Drawn
3rd Test: Pakistan by 341 runs
Closing Ratings: Pak: 1152.03 Ind: 1152.41
A deeply unsatisfying series that, as predicted, ended just as it was about to become interesting. The less said about the first two tests the better. Barring a catostrophic collapse, and possibly even then, they were both destined for draws on the two of the flattest decks in cricket history. Oddly, a few people made excuses for the groundmen on the basis that creating a lively pitch in those weather conditions was difficult. To them I offer up our local groundman, who never seems to have that problem no matter the weather.
The third test couldn't have started any worse for Pakistan. A green deck, a lost toss, a hat-trick to Pathan in the opening over, and in short time the Inzaman-less lineup was reduced to 6/39. But, with support from Razzaq and Shoaib Akhtar -- both of whom have lately matured -- Kamran Akmal made 113 in a knock that has everywhere been described as brilliant. India then threw it away. There is no other word for it. All out for 238, 7 runs behind, with good bowling from Mohammad Asif, Razzaq and Shoaib. Then the batsmen fired, seven fifites, a blistering 60 from Afridi, a 90 from Razzaq and 139 from Faisal Iqbal set the improbable target of 607 in almost two days. India never looked like making a go at it. Pathan played well in this series, but this is a team without backbone, and it was shown again. Pakistan, after a lull seem to be back as a force, almost, but not quite into the third ranking spot.
Bangladesh (610.86) v Sri Lanka (1067.61) - 2 Tests.
What to say here? Sri Lanka are rumoured to be leaving out their best players, making it little more than an A tour -- albeit one they will win at a canter. Unlike Zimbabwe, this unequal state of affairs won't last forever as Bangladesh have a lot of good young players coming through, but there are better ways.
India (1152.41) v England (1204.38) - 3 Tests.
Now this is an interesting series. England played poorly in Pakistan, losing from positions that in the previous year they had turned to their advantage. India effectively played one test in Pakistan and lost it badly. They are a different proposition at home, and England are as yet inexperienced tourists. Despite the misgivings I have over India's attitude towards winning, I think they will shade England here. Both teams have plenty to prove though.
New Zealand (1051.26) v West Indies (812.23) - 3 Tests.
The rating suggest this won't be a contest. History suggests the same. When New Zealand's doesn't have their home games rained off they are a difficult opponent. The West Indies have shown little to suggest they are any better than the embarrassing side that toured in 1999-2000. Neither side has any particular form though, so it could make for interesting opinion pieces if nothing else.
South Africa (1122.41) v Australia (1349.53) - 3 Tests.
The return leg of a series where South Africa struggled to assert themselves. I'm not convinced Australia are travelling so happily right now, but the focus is on building for the Ashes rather than this. Quite a few players will be looking to cement their place in the side, and -- as you'd expect in South Africa -- the games will probably be intense at times. This will be a better contest than the tests in Australia, but the Aussies will be very disappointed if they lose.
Zimbabwe (9th) 672.64
Cricket - Ratings - Test
9th February, 2006 13:12:04
[#] [0 comments]