Ask the Laws Department: XVI (All out)
MCC, the Guardian of the Laws of cricket, discuss key issues in 'Ask the Laws Department' in conjunction with Wisden Cricketer. The sixteenth issue considers when a team is 'all out'.
All-out confusion
Cross-river rivals brought up an interesting point in law There was an incident towards the start of last season in the County Championship match between Surrey and Middlesex at The Oval which, despite not hitting the headlines, raised an interesting point of Law.
The match ended in a draw after Middlesex fell short in
a thrilling run chase, losing their ninth wicket to a run out
from the last ball with two runs needed to win.
That all sounds fairly straightforward but the controversy centred on the Middlesex No.11, Tim Murtagh - who coincidentally is a former Surrey player too.
He was carried off the field after injuring his hamstring earlier in the day and there were reports that he was not able to bat, even with a runner.
MCC received inquiries from several Surrey supporters and a journalist as to whether the result was correct. They argued that, if Murtagh was unable to bat, Middlesex were all out and Surrey should be winners.
Their claims were in vain and the draw was indeed the
correct result.
Law 21.1 states that to win a two-innings match one side must score a total of runs in excess of that scored in the two completed innings of the opposite side.
Are you injured out - or injured not out? It is true that at the conclusion of the match Surrey had scored more runs than Middlesex but Middlesex did not have two completed innings.
Law 12.3 covers completed innings: "A side’s innings is to be considered as completed if (a) the side is all out or (b) at the fall of a wicket, further balls remain to be bowled, but no further batsman is available to come in or (c) the captain declares the innings closed or (d) the captain forfeits the innings or (e) in the case of an agreement under 1(b) above, either (i) the prescribed number of overs has been bowled or (ii) the prescribed time has expired."
The key part in the Oval match is (b) namely that further balls must remain to be bowled.
If the ninth wicket falls off the last ball of the match, it does not matter if the No.11 is not able to take to the field. The innings cannot be deemed to be complete as the fielding side would not have had the chance to get him out, even if he had been fit and able to bat.
There is a difference between a side being all out and an innings being completed.
Where a batsman has retired hurt and is unable to return to the crease at the fall of the ninth wicket (and there are balls remaining to be bowled), Law 2.9(a) instructs that he is to be recorded as ‘Retired - not out’.
Consequently, although under Law 12, above, the innings is completed, the side cannot be considered to be all out.
Yet another twist is provided in the same situation if the reason for the batsman’s retirement was not injury, illness etc.
In that case if, for whatever reason, he is unable to resume his innings, he is to be recorded as ‘Retired - out’.
When the other nine wickets had all fallen, the side would be
all out.
Ask the umpire
- with MCC Laws sub-committee
"The wicketkeeper removes his glove from his throwing hand but holds it in his gloved hand. If the ball, being returned to him, when gathered makes contact with the glove being held, is the keeper guilty of illegal fielding?"
MCC says:
Law 40.1 states: "The wicketkeeper is the only member of the fielding side permitted to wear gloves and external leg guards.
"If he does so, these are to be regarded as part of his person for the purposes of Law 41.2 (Fielding the ball)."
A glove is "worn" only when it is on the wicketkeeper’s hand, so a glove being held is not part of his person.
Holding the glove when catching the ball would count as wilful contact and so, as laid down in Law 41.2, the ball becomes dead and five penalty runs should be awarded to the batting side.
