Not a no-ball?

by Guest Thu 18 Dec 2008, 00:40

I was watching the Aus SA game last night, and Steyn seemed to clock up a few no balls. This got me thinking... Obviously there has to be a limit; you can't just run up to the batsman and bowl from under his nose. But is there a maximum distance you can bowl from?

I was thinking you could easily pick up a couple of wickets by bowling it halfway through your run up as the batsman's gazing at his feet and tapping his bat to the ground in preparation. Of course, you could end up looking very stupid, but hey, footballers try to cheekily chip penalties in occasionally, and occasionally they look like idiots for it.

Have I missed something glaringly obvious in the laws?

by LeFromage Thu 18 Dec 2008, 00:43

No. I remember Zulu Klusener bowling against England (possibly to Alec Stewart) from about forty yards just as a surprise effort in the midst of a long-innings.

Didn't amount to anything. The batsman just patted it back down the pitch.

by OP Tipping Thu 18 Dec 2008, 00:45

Might be good for a laugh, I doubt it would often be effective, but it is not against the Laws.

by doctorspin Thu 18 Dec 2008, 00:49

I don't believe there is. Jerome Taylor tried to bowl from a couple of yards behind the crease in the final over of the first recent ODI against Pakistan. He got smashed for 6 and the rest of the over was hammered.

WI lost from a near impregnable position (16 off the last over or something.)

It usually doesn't work because it farks the bowler's rhythm.

Gladstone Small did it successfully as a habit to counter a terrible no-ball problem. (Wonder if BLee/Flintoff are members here.)

by Guest Thu 18 Dec 2008, 00:50

OP Tipping wrote:Might be good for a laugh, I doubt it would often be effective, but it is not against the Laws.

Obviously it's not something you'd do every over, or even every match. But if a batsman is clearly not paying any attention until you're in your delivery stride why not...

by Guest Thu 18 Dec 2008, 00:54

doctorspin wrote:Gladstone Small did it successfully as a habit to counter a terrible no-ball problem. (Wonder if BLee/Flintoff are members here.)

Extension to that: If bowlers are having that much of a problem in a game why do they not just push their marker back a half-pace? Avoids nasty footholes too. I wouldn't know if something that small ruins a bowler's rhythm or not, given that I can't bowl.

You can't say that the ball being delivered from the stumps instead of the popping crease is going to be significantly easier to play.

by doctorspin Thu 18 Dec 2008, 00:56

Clamson wrote:
OP Tipping wrote:Might be good for a laugh, I doubt it would often be effective, but it is not against the Laws.

Obviously it's not something you'd do every over, or even every match. But if a batsman is clearly not paying any attention until you're in your delivery stride why not...

Quite, in theory it should be a great variation; would literally take away a yard or two of pace (and I mean literally literally) as well as surprising the batsman at the early release. So he should be doubly early in his stroke.

Suppose it requires a great amount of practice as on the occassions I have seen it tried (Small excepted, but he wasn't doing it as a variation) it comes out all wrong.

Being a bowler myself, there is something very strange about the whole run-up to the wicket. The smallest variation eg from where you start from can completely throw you and you just lose it completely.

by doctorspin Thu 18 Dec 2008, 01:00

Clamson wrote:
doctorspin wrote:Gladstone Small did it successfully as a habit to counter a terrible no-ball problem. (Wonder if BLee/Flintoff are members here.)

Extension to that: If bowlers are having that much of a problem in a game why do they not just push their marker back a half-pace? Avoids nasty footholes too. I wouldn't know if something that small ruins a bowler's rhythm or not, given that I can't bowl.

You can't say that the ball being delivered from the stumps instead of the popping crease is going to be significantly easier to play.

I just addressed this in passing in the above post. i also heard the great Benaud once ask this rhetorically during a match where someone was having no-ball problems. His "answer" was along the same lines, in essence...it just doesn't work like that.

Gladstone Small re-fashioned his whole run-up. It is not something that can be done ad hoc although I can't explain why. It just doesn't work!

by embee Thu 18 Dec 2008, 03:07

It's a discouraged practice because of

....the danger of the umpire getting a ball in the back of the head

...the umpires inability to see if the back foot is within the return crease

...the umpires inability to see if it was Chucked

plus it may value as a "shock" once...but after that is probably just going to get belted

by PeterCS Thu 18 Dec 2008, 12:14

It would also be against the spirit of the game (and therefore laws) to release before the batsman is ready.

Otherwise when batsmen pull away at the last second (as they do over sightscreens, insects, captain's orders, etc.) the bowlers would be allowed a lot of clean bowled dismissals.

by Rachel Thu 18 Dec 2008, 12:36

Peter,

The batsman is supposed to be ready from the moment the bowler begins his run up.

by PeterCS Thu 18 Dec 2008, 12:38

That's as may be, Rach, but I can't see most umpires giving it. Would you?

by taipan Thu 18 Dec 2008, 12:40

Giving a decision?

by PeterCS Thu 18 Dec 2008, 12:41

Giving out to a "pre-delivery".

by taipan Thu 18 Dec 2008, 12:43

Don't see why the bowler can't change it up a bit.

Similar to a reverse sweep I would say

by PeterCS Thu 18 Dec 2008, 12:49

But that's basically my point.

"IIRC", batsmen can change their stance (even, say, right to left handed if they are eccentric) without notice. Bowlers have to tell the umpire of such switches, I think. (Does that include seam to spin and vice versa?...) And while that is commonsense (to cover sightscreen changes etc.), I'd have that thought in all such cases, the bowler is under greater obligation than the batsman to announce any "funny stuff".

But anyway ....

by taipan Thu 18 Dec 2008, 12:51

As far as i know he bowler doesn't have to advise a change in the length of his run up, or what variation he is bowling.

All he has to advise is whether he is coming over or round. And he doesn't have the underarm option any more.

by embee Thu 18 Dec 2008, 12:57

The LAWS of cricket wrote:Law 23 Dead Ball

3(v) he is satisfied that for an adequate reason the striker is not ready for the delivery of the ball and, if the ball is delivered, makes no attempt to play it.

by embee Thu 18 Dec 2008, 12:59

taipan wrote:As far as i know he bowler doesn't have to advise a change in the length of his run up, or what variation he is bowling.

All he has to advise is whether he is coming over or round. And he doesn't have the underarm option any more.

...and which arm he is bowling with

by lardbucket Thu 18 Dec 2008, 19:39

Hadlee very occasionally bowled a longer ball, from a yard or two further back. His run was so grooved, I guess, he just started from a yard or two further back.

by Basil Thu 18 Dec 2008, 19:42

Robert Croft bowls the occasional 23 yarder

by PearlJ Thu 18 Dec 2008, 20:01

Suliemann Benn used a long ball quite a lot when I saw him against Australia.

by spangler Thu 18 Dec 2008, 21:03

Dello wrote:No. I remember Zulu Klusener bowling against England (possibly to Alec Stewart) from about forty yards just as a surprise effort in the midst of a long-innings.

Didn't amount to anything. The batsman just patted it back down the pitch.

He was asked (maybe ordered) not to bowl from behind the umpire because the umpir couldn't see what he was bowling.

by PeterCS Thu 18 Dec 2008, 22:15

Just coming back to this ....

Surely the bowler has to tell the ump if he switches from quick to slow, or vice versa? (Sobers, Grieg, Symonds, three examples off the top of my head.)

Reason: It might easily affect e.g. how the batsman wishes to take guard. What you can kick away with impunity from a spinner, might trap you LB if it swings or seams? And thus, surely the batsman might want to address the ball differently (stance, guard).

I know I am lazy not checking the Laws. ...

by spangler Thu 18 Dec 2008, 22:48

Afridi used to mix up his leggies with a seam up quicker ball which got up into the 80 mph region without telling the umpires.

I've seen SRT bowl spin and seam up in one over without notifying

P.s can't be bothered to look up the actual rules to see if there is an actual rule about this

by Sponsored content

Not a no-ball?

Not a no-ball?

Re: Not a no-ball?

Re: Not a no-ball?

Re: Not a no-ball?

Re: Not a no-ball?

Re: Not a no-ball?

Re: Not a no-ball?

Re: Not a no-ball?

Re: Not a no-ball?

Re: Not a no-ball?

Re: Not a no-ball?

Re: Not a no-ball?

Re: Not a no-ball?

Re: Not a no-ball?

Re: Not a no-ball?

Re: Not a no-ball?

Re: Not a no-ball?

Re: Not a no-ball?

Re: Not a no-ball?

Re: Not a no-ball?

Re: Not a no-ball?

Re: Not a no-ball?

Re: Not a no-ball?

Re: Not a no-ball?

Re: Not a no-ball?

Re: Not a no-ball?