Laws of the game - ask anything!!

TrueDub

im conscious that the World Cup in particular has brought a lot of new people to the game, and there's no doubt that it's not a simple game, with lots of jargon and conventions.

With that in mind, I thought a thread to ask the laws questions might be a good idea. There's no such thing as a stupid question, or one that's too simple. There are lots of knowledgeable people here who will be only too glad to explain the complexities of the game.

So have at it - but please note the following:

Mention what type of cricket you're talking about (tests, Limited overs (like the World Cup), T20 (like the IPL) etc
Accept that "it depends", followed by a long answer might well be the simplest explanation you'll get.

For responders: specify the type of cricket you're talking about, and point out where they differ. Have patience, and remember that we all wondered where silly mid-off was once!

Lovely Bloke

Where is Silly Mid Off?

And what's so damn silly about it.

Adamcp898

Baldy Conscience wrote: »

Where is Silly Mid Off?

And what's so damn silly about it.

When describing field positions in cricket you can split the field down the middle into the "off side" and the "leg side". If the batsman is right handed the off-side is everything to his right, whilst the leg-side is everything on his left.

Mid-off is generally standing fairly straight on with respect to the batsman and is there to field straight drives.

The "silly" description of certain fielding positions is added when that person is standing very close to the batsman i.e. if the batsman strikes the ball well in your direction you're not going to have much of an opportunity to react and so there's a higher chance of you being hurt basically. It's usually only used along with a slower bowler when a tail-end batsman is at the crease in order to put an extra bit of pressure on them.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oiwii5mGAmE

pelevin

Can batsman still use a runner if injured or has that been taken out of the game? Fwiw if a bowler is hampered that's tough, so imo why should a batsman be treated more favourably.

pistol_75

pelevin wrote: »

Can batsman still use a runner if injured or has that been taken out of the game? Fwiw if a bowler is hampered that's tough, so imo why should a batsman be treated more favourably.

If the injury happens during the game then yes they can.

bill66

Couple of points, in the video Slater is at short leg (left handed batsman). Runners were banned in international cricket towards the end of 2011, as far as I know this still stands. In all other types of cricket runners are still allowed.

Adamcp898

bill66 wrote: »

Couple of points, in the video Slater is at short leg (left handed batsman). Runners were banned in international cricket towards the end of 2011, as far as I know this still stands. In all other types of cricket runners are still allowed.

Yep quite right, was only using it as an example of someone fielding from one of the "silly" positions but perhaps should have made that clear. There weren't many "amazing" catches on youtube from specifically silly mid-off actually.

Snickers Man

Good thread!

Just thinking about this in the wake of Ed Joyce's extraordinary lucky escape against the UAE yesterday: if a bowled ball hits the wicket and dislodges only one of the bails, is the batsman out? Or do both of the bails have to hit the ground for him to be dismissed?

srfc d16

This is probably very obvious but how is the net run rate calculated?
I get that it is similar to goal difference in football but i just cant figure it out.

bill66

Snickers Man wrote: »

Good thread!

Just thinking about this in the wake of Ed Joyce's extraordinary lucky escape against the UAE yesterday: if a bowled ball hits the wicket and dislodges only one of the bails, is the batsman out? Or do both of the bails have to hit the ground for him to be dismissed?

Yes, one bail down is out.

bill66

srfc d16 wrote: »

This is probably very obvious but how is the net run rate calculated?
I get that it is similar to goal difference in football but i just cant figure it out.

net run rate is calculated by dividing number of runs scored by the number of overs batted and subtracting the number of runs conceded divided by the number of overs bowled.

Gyalist

Snickers Man wrote: »

Good thread!

Just thinking about this in the wake of Ed Joyce's extraordinary lucky escape against the UAE yesterday: if a bowled ball hits the wicket and dislodges only one of the bails, is the batsman out? Or do both of the bails have to hit the ground for him to be dismissed?

Only one bail needs to be removed.


Regarding runners, they are still allowed under the Laws of Cricket. The prohibition of runners in international cricket is not due to a change in the laws but are amendments to the Standard Internationall Match Playing Conditions governing the 3 formats of international cricket. A subtle but important distinction.

telecaster

Re: Leg Before Wicket. I was under the impression that any non foul ball which hits the batsman's leg pads (without first hitting the bat) on a trajectory that would have otherwise hit the stumps is LBW. Is it more complicated than that, is where the ball bounces en route a factor?

bill66

telecaster wrote: »

Re: Leg Before Wicket. I was under the impression that any non foul ball which hits the batsman's leg pads (without first hitting the bat) on a trajectory that would have otherwise hit the stumps is LBW. Is it more complicated than that, is where the ball bounces en route a factor?

No ball that lands outside the line of leg stump can lead to LBW, no ball that strikes the batsman outside the line of the stumps can be LBW, if he is playing a shot. So yes it is a bit more complicated and does seem a bit unfair to the bowler, but then the game is run for batsmen.

Mantis Toboggan

How many balls bowled in an over?

pistol_75

Tyson Fury wrote: »

How many balls bowled in an over?

Six

bill66

Tyson Fury wrote: »

How many balls bowled in an over?

6 balls in an over. This has not always been so, Australian overs used to have 8 balls as far as I remember.

Gyalist

Tyson Fury wrote: »

How many balls bowled in an over?

Six legal deliveries.

TrueDub

A general explanatory note:

The game is governed by 42 Laws, available for reading here.

There are also regulations for specific competitions and types of cricket, for instance:

• Test cricket
• One-Day Internationals
• Twenty20

All of these regulations make changes to the laws in one way or another, to provide for governance of that particular type.

This extends all the way through the game, for example Cricket Leinster have a specific set of regulations to cover game played in their competitions.

dogsears

If the wicket keeper runs a batsman out (e.g attempts a run, gets sent back, keeper throws down wicket), is that recorded as stumped?

Adamcp898

dogsears wrote: »

If the wicket keeper runs a batsman out (e.g attempts a run, gets sent back, keeper throws down wicket), is that recorded as stumped?

The batsman is run out if attempting a run and stumped if he is only out of his crease.

Mysterypunter

No. Its a run out if you are attempting a run. A stumping occurs if a batsman leaves the crease. Usually while playing an attacking stroke and the keeper takes the bails off. Loads of stumpings used to be off slow bowlers, but nowadays keepers standing up to seam bowler get a few if the batsman overbalances for example. If you raise the back foot you could be stumped. Also as a batsman you are out if part of your foot is not behind the crease line and the wicket is broken.

Snickers Man

Another thing that confuses me. LBW basically means that if the ball hits a batsman's leg/pad and thereby is prevented from hitting the wicket, the batsman is out, LBW. Right?

If the ball hits the bat and then proceeds to the wicket and knocks off a bail, the batsman is out, clean bowled.

But if the ball hits his bat first and then the pad, he's not out, even if the ball was likely to proceed to the stumps and knock a bail off?

Are the above statements correct? Why does a batsman who plays on to his pad get a reprieve while one who plays on to the stumps doesn't?.

pistol_75

Snickers Man wrote: »

Another thing that confuses me. LBW basically means that if the ball hits a batsman's leg/pad and thereby is prevented from hitting the wicket, the batsman is out, LBW. Right?

A bit more complicated. If a ball pitches (hits the ground) outside the line of leg stump, the batsman cannot be out LBW regardless if it is going to hit the wickets or not.
If the ball hits the batsman's pad and the contact takes place outside the line of off stump then it is not out. Another factor considered by the umpires is the height at which the ball will reach the stumps and that it will not pass over them.

If the ball hits the bat and then proceeds to the wicket and knocks off a bail, the batsman is out, clean bowled.

But if the ball hits his bat first and then the pad, he's not out, even if the ball was likely to proceed to the stumps and knock a bail off?

Yes as they have made contact with the ball first.

Are the above statements correct? Why does a batsman who plays on to his pad get a reprieve while one who plays on to the stumps doesn't?.

The object is to defend their stumps, not their pads.

Hope the above explains it?

pajor

Is there a limit to the number of reviews that can be made during a match to see if the batsman is out or not?

Lovely Bloke

pajor wrote: »

Is there a limit to the number of reviews that can be made during a match to see if the batsman is out or not?

If they are successful, then no - but if even one is unsuccessful then you get no more (in the WC, it may vary for other versions of the game)

secondrowgal

Just been to the Ire v SA match. First ever cricket game! What's a Powerplay please?

TrueDub

A powerplay is a set period of the game (number of overs) where the fielding side may only have a set number of players outside the fielding circle.

It's designed to provide more space for the batsmen to hit into, thus making the game more exciting. Supposedly.

mcgratheoin

If a bowler removes the bails of a non-striker trying to steal a few yards down the crease - is it recorded as a run out or is there a more specific term?

pistol_75

mcgratheoin wrote: »

If a bowler removes the bails of a non-striker trying to steal a few yards down the crease - is it recorded as a run out or is there a more specific term?

It is rare it happens but would be recorded as a run out. Normally they might warn them if they don't stop they will take the bails off the next time.

TrueDub

mcgratheoin wrote: »

If a bowler removes the bails of a non-striker trying to steal a few yards down the crease - is it recorded as a run out or is there a more specific term?

As Pistol75 says, this is a rarity, although it's happened a couple of times recently.

If it happens, it's recorded as a run-out.

There is no requirement in the Laws of the game for the bowler to warn the batsman, this is a custom only.

Madd Finn

TrueDub wrote: »

A powerplay is a set period of the game (number of overs) where the fielding side may only have a set number of players outside the fielding circle.

It's designed to provide more space for the batsmen to hit into, thus making the game more exciting. Supposedly.

I was once told that this only used to apply to the last few overs in a limited overs match and it was because some wiseacre captain (I think it was Mike Brearley) whose team was defending a good but not unassailable lead, put nearly all of his fielders along the boundary, thereby giving the chasing (batting) team the ability to score lots of singles and even twos but made scoring a four all but impossible. A cricketing equivalent of "parking the bus."

Is there a "bowling" equivalent of the power play and how does it work.

Madd Finn

And I've a question: for the current World Cup, how are teams level on points at the end of the first round separated? I understand it's to do with net run rate but I don't know how this is calculated.

Does Ireland have any chance of beating Pakistan and/or West Indies on run rate if we all finish on 6 points?

Madd Finn

OK so that last question was tumbleweed. So let's try again.

If two teams finish a match (in this world cup) tied on runs scored is the match automatically declared a tie, or do they count things like number of wickets remaining to decide a winner?

For example, Ireland and Pakistan are now on six points each with one game left, against each other. West Indies are on four points with one game left against UAE.

Assuming Windies beat UAE, they will finish level on points with whoever loses the Ireland Pakistan game. It will then come down to whatever method is used to separate teams tied on points (my previous question)

But if Ireland and Pakistan were to get a point each, then Windies would be out regardless of what they do against UAE.

So I guess my question is, is it possible for Ireland and Pakistan to get a point each without the game being rained off?

Remember Austria v West Germany in World cup 82?:D

Pudsy33

Madd Finn wrote: »

And I've a question: for the current World Cup, how are teams level on points at the end of the first round separated? I understand it's to do with net run rate but I don't know how this is calculated.

Does Ireland have any chance of beating Pakistan and/or West Indies on run rate if we all finish on 6 points?

Since you asked nicely

Teams on equal points are separated on Net run rate(nrr). Nrr is runs scored/overs batted- runs conceeded/overs bowled. If the batting team is bowled out before it's 50 overs then there score is still divided by 50.

The answer to your second question is no, we are too far behind. We need a point out of our last game, or we need UAE to avoid defeat to WI.

Pudsy33

And yeah, if both teams finish on equal runs the game is drawn. A point each.

Lovely Bloke

So, he's correct, Ireland & Pakistan could "engineer" a draw, get 7 points and both go through?

KevIRL

Baldy Conscience wrote: »

So, he's correct, Ireland & Pakistan could "engineer" a draw, get 7 points and both go through?

A tie perhaps but not a draw. I know how much of a stickler you can be for using the correct terminology

Madd Finn

So our options are:

1) Beat Pakistan (Hmm)

2) "Engineer" a tied game with Pakistan so we both get a point and go through. Nobody would believe us though.

3) Pray for a downpour in either Napier or Adelaide so that one or other of the matches (Ireland v Pakistan or Windes v UAE) gets rained off and we either get the point we need or the Windies fail to get the two points they need.

Looks like its a case of the Irish praying for rain. Come on God. It's not like you don't give us enough when we DON'T want it.

the groutch

what's the criteria for a free hit in the WC?
is it every no ball? can it be given for persistently bowling wides or dangerously high?

TrueDub

the groutch wrote: »

what's the criteria for a free hit in the WC?
is it every no ball? can it be given for persistently bowling wides or dangerously high?

It's for foot-fault no-balls only - I'm nearly sure it's for back-foot as well as front-foot.

It cannot be given for the other things you're describing, there are other sanctions for those things - see Law 42 - Fair and Unfair Play

HonalD

TrueDub wrote: »

I'm nearly sure it's for back-foot as well as front-foot.

That's my understanding too.

pistol_75

the groutch wrote: »

what's the criteria for a free hit in the WC?
is it every no ball? can it be given for persistently bowling wides or dangerously high?

It's for a front foot no ball, so where the bowler oversteps the line. The batsman cannot be out the next ball (except run out).

TrueDub

pistol_75 wrote: »

It's for a front foot no ball, so where the bowler oversteps the line. The batsman cannot be out the next ball (except run out).

No it's definitely for all foot-fault no-balls - see Section 24.2 of the Playing Regulations.