Giving a new meaning to “spin bowling”...

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-11-09/spin-bowling-360-degree-twirl-falls-foul-of-umpires/10480738

Shame about the spoilsport umpiring...

Known as the Whirling Dervish delivery.

Quaint.

beamer wrote:https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-11-09/spin-bowling-360-degree-twirl-falls-foul-of-umpires/10480738

Shame about the spoilsport umpiring...

41.4 Deliberate attempt to distract striker

41.4.1 It is unfair for any fielder deliberately to attempt to distract the striker while he/she is preparing to receive or receiving a delivery.

41.4.2 If either umpire considers that any action by a fielder is such an attempt, he/she shall immediately call and signal Dead ball and inform the other umpire of the reason for the call. The bowler’s end umpire shall

- award 5 Penalty runs to the batting side.

- inform the captain of the fielding side, the batsmen and, as soon as practicable, the captain of the batting side of the reason for the action.

Neither batsman shall be dismissed from that delivery and the ball shall not count as one of the over.

Together with the other umpire report the occurrence as soon as possible after the match to the Executive of the offending side and to any Governing Body responsible for the match, who shall take such action as is considered appropriate against the captain, any other individuals concerned and, if appropriate, the team.



The whirling dervish was deliberate and had no technical part in the bowler delivering the ball ....therefore it falls straight into this Law

Dont blame an umpire for applying the Laws ...

Weirdly, he had been allowed to bowl it in the recently concluded Vijay Hazare trophy.

Have no idea about the umpires in each tournament, but would assume that the Hazare trophy has a higher level of umpires and they missed the rule.

embee wrote:

beamer wrote:https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-11-09/spin-bowling-360-degree-twirl-falls-foul-of-umpires/10480738

Shame about the spoilsport umpiring...

41.4 Deliberate attempt to distract striker

41.4.1 It is unfair for any fielder deliberately to attempt to distract the striker while he/she is preparing to receive or receiving a delivery.

41.4.2 If either umpire considers that any action by a fielder is such an attempt, he/she shall immediately call and signal Dead ball and inform the other umpire of the reason for the call.  The bowler’s end umpire shall

- award 5 Penalty runs to the batting side.

- inform the captain of the fielding side, the batsmen and, as soon as practicable, the captain of the batting side of the reason for the action.

Neither batsman shall be dismissed from that delivery and the ball shall not count as one of the over.

Together with the other umpire report the occurrence as soon as possible after the match to the Executive of the offending side and to any Governing Body responsible for the match, who shall take such action as is considered appropriate against the captain, any other individuals concerned and, if appropriate, the team.  



The whirling dervish was deliberate and had no technical part in the bowler delivering the ball ....therefore it falls straight into this Law

Dont blame an umpire for applying the Laws ...

Cheers A.

Was 5 runs awarded in this case?

Didn't see any mention of five penalty runs in the papers.

And maybe I'm imagining things, but I seem to remember Gillespie have a arms spread out eagle like run up on one or two occasions? And Gough's tongue out as well.

Your memory is sound, t.

tricycle wrote:Didn't see any mention of five penalty runs in the papers.

And maybe I'm imagining things, but I seem to remember Gillespie have a arms spread out eagle like run up on one or two occasions? And Gough's tongue out as well.

Not forgetting Andre Nel, and his alter-ego, Gunther was it? Also worked in the coffee shop in Friends

tricycle wrote:Weirdly, he had been allowed to bowl it in the recently concluded Vijay Hazare trophy.

Have no idea about the umpires in each tournament, but would assume that the Hazare trophy has a higher level of umpires and they missed the rule.

It might have been discussed

A former FC umpire said he would have dealt with it by telling the bowler to stop being a dick head

Where do you draw the line between a quirky action and a deliberate attempt to distract the batsman, though? If someone did, say, a hop, skip and jump to end their runup before releasing the ball, would that be banned?

The game favours the batsman enough, let the bowler do what he likes, as long as it’s a continuous action.

If he does it every ball then it isnt a problem

It's the one off/occasional bullshit that gets stopped