"But lo! He was a hero back home in Ukraine."
This gem is only one of the reasons to read this report about a certain no-ball. There are others, including "legally, the bowler did nothing wrong but it was the spirit of the game that took a mauling."
August 18, 2010
Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)
Now it is has been fixed to Uruguay. It no longer reads Ukraine.
I don't really have any comment on the incident but for this. I think that the rules are really illogical. The ball counts as a ball that the batsman has faced, like every other no-ball. Then why not count the runs that he scores off it? I don't really see who is being harmed here if they decide to count the runs. Also, it does not make sense that the game gets over "mid-ball".
I used to see cricket much more often till 6-7 years back. But I don't recall this particular law at all. In fact, I remember some matches where similar situations have occurred but still don't recall such a law. Is this a relatively new law that has come in the last 5 years?
To follow up on my earlier question, yes it is a relatively new law which came into effect in 2000. My source the following article by Ayaz Memon.
"The real villain is the law disallowing a batsman runs his strokes merit in a specific situation. Ironically, this law was brought into play by the MCC in circa 2000, the same year in which the 'Spirit of Cricket' clause was given top billing by the game's minders. The folly of it exposed, there is urgent need to revert to the old law in which batsmen were credited with runs their stroke merited irrespective of the situation."
Post a Comment