The Marylebone Cricket Club (MCC), which maintains the laws that govern professional cricket, issued a clarification on Wednesday after Pakistan batter during the 2nd ODI between both sides in Dhaka sparked debate over the spirit of cricket.
MCC released a statement that reads: “Under Laws, there is little that either umpire could have done differently. The non-striker was clearly out of his ground when the wicket was broken, and the ball was in play. That is out.”
“It is also worth pointing out that the non-striker had left his ground when the ball was in play and had just started to attempt to regain his ground when he collided with Mehidy. Furthermore, no batter should attempt to pick the ball up without the consent of the fielding side, and had he done so, he would have been at risk of an Obstructing the field dismissal. In retrospect, he would have been better using that time to attempt to regain his ground,” reads the statement.
MCC has issued a clarification on the run out incident which took place during the second men’s One-Day International between Bangladesh and Pakistan.
Read more –
— Marylebone Cricket Club (@MCCOfficial)
In the 4th delivery of the 39th over, Miraz was bowling to Mohammad Rizwan who played the ball back towards the right of the bowler which Miraz stopped with his boot. Meanwhile, Agha, who was on the non striker’s end, was out of his crease and in Miraz’s way with both players in close proximity. Agha then bent down to pick the ball and hand it back to the bowler but Miraz swooped in himself and in an under-armed throw knocked the bails off with Agha still outside the crease. The decision was sent upstairs and the third umpire ruled it as a dismissal much to the chagrin of Agha who then proceeded to throw his batting gloves and helmet to the ground near the boundary ropes before exiting the ground.
MCC further said, “There have been some suggestions that the ball should have been treated as Dead. That is not viable under the Laws; the ball does not become dead when players collide – if it did, that would incentivise players to seek out collisions when the situation was advantageous. There was no question of a serious injury, so there could be no call of Dead ball for that. It could not have been clear to the umpire that all the players ceased to consider the ball to be in play, since Mehidy clearly believed it was live, even if Agha did not. And it cannot have been finally settled in the hands of the bowler or wicket-keeper, since it was on the ground.”
“Under the new Laws, which will come into effect in October, an umpire will be able to determine that the ball is finally settled if it is stationary on the ground. However, it is hard to make an argument that the ball is finally settled if the nearest fielder to it is attempting to run the non-striker out, with that non-striker out of their ground.”
“There is no case, therefore, to be made that this was Not out under Law, nor that the Law could be re-written to somehow make a situation like this Not out. Yet many people have expressed sympathy for Agha and suggested that this dismissal was against the Spirit of Cricket. It certainly would have been possible for Mehidy, as Bangladesh captain, to withdraw his appeal. Agha clearly thought the ball was dead and was attempting to assist the fielding side after an unintentional collision which made it harder for him to regain his ground. The Laws allow a withdrawal for incidents where the batter is out in Law, but the fielding side feels that it would be better, within the Spirit of Cricket, to allow them to continue.”
