KEEPING LORD'S WORLD CLASS
Founded in 1787, Marylebone Cricket Club is the most active and famous cricket club in the world and owner of Lord's Cricket Ground - the Home of Cricket.
© Copyright 2013
There is a batsman with a runner. The runner is at the non-striker’s end. The injured batsman is standing at square leg, out of the game. The striker hits a ball, which is not a No ball, in the air towards the square leg fielder. The injured striker wilfully prevents a catch being taken. How should an appeal be answered?
This is the same situation as, with both batsmen fit, the non-striker obstructing a catch. In that case, although it is the non-striker who has obstructed the field, under Law 37.3 (Obstructing a ball from being caught) it is the striker who is out. Here, although the injured man has brought himself into the game by an act of obstruction, the same principle applies. It is the uninjured striker who is out.
[Law reference: 37.3, 2.8 (d) (i)]
What happens if the non-striker, holding his gloves, drops one of them and the ball in play touches it?
If the umpire decides that the dropping of the glove was a wilful act, then the batsman is out Obstructing the field and on appeal would be dismissed. If it was clear that dropping the glove was entirely accidental then the incident should be treated in the same way as if the ball had accidentally struck a batsman while he was running. The ball remains in play. Although, by allowing the possibility of runs, this may seem to give unfair advantage to the batting side it should be remembered that equally it may be a disadvantage since, for example, either of them could be out if striking the glove deflected the ball on to the wicket, when otherwise it would have missed the stumps.
[Law reference: 37.2]