Run out controversy: England citing spirit of cricket while disregarding laws of the game is laughable

Much Ado About Nothing, a play by British author William Shakespeare, is a comedy in which a woman is falsely accused of doing something she did not do. Ironically, what has unfolded in Britain after a legitimate run-out during the third and final women’s ODI between hosts England and India on Saturday is also described more fully in the same four words, Much Ado About Nothing. Can be done, and it is as tragic and humorous as drama.

In the 44th over of England’s innings, with 17 runs needed off 39 balls and only one wicket remaining, England’s Charlie Dean went too far back before bowling the ball and Indian bowler Deepti Sharma removed the bails on the non. Striker end. The field umpire gave the verdict to the video umpire and Dean was declared out.

But for some, the dismissal was against the spirit of cricket (SoC) and they criticized the dismissal, including several England players, both men and women.

England men’s team pacer Stuart Broad called it a “terrible way to end a game” on Twitter. Wicketkeeper-batsman Sam Billings said, “Not just cricket”.

England women’s team all-rounder Georgia Elvis found it “ridiculous”, while former bowler Alex Hartley questioned “is India the only way to win this game?”.

Meanwhile, Indian players and their supporters have used the rule book allowing such dismissals.

“You did the right thing. And don’t let anyone tell you otherwise,” said former India opener Aakash Chopra. “Will it be in the spirit of the game to run short to win?” asked noted commentator Harsha Bhogle.

India women’s captain Harmanpreet Kaur backed Deepti and said, “It is ICC’s rule and you always take those chances.” Deepti claimed that she had “warned him (Dean), he left the crease early on several occasions. We even told the umpire. We were within the rules.” However, the rules do not require a warning before the dismissal takes effect.

England regular captain Heather Knight, who is recovering from hip surgery, refuted Dipti’s claims, saying, “No warnings given… about warnings.”

This method of dismissal has always been legal under Article 41.16.1 of the Laws of Cricket, but for a long time was classified as ‘unfair play’. The Marylebone Cricket Club (MCC), the custodian of cricket laws, recently removed it from the ‘Unfair Play’ section and reclassified it as a routine run out. The International Cricket Council has also notified that from October 1, it will also adopt the changes of the MCC.

Article 41.16.1 of the Laws of Cricket states, “If the non-striker is out of his ground at any time from the moment the ball is in play, unless the bowler would ordinarily be expected to release the ball , the non-striker is liable to be run out. In these circumstances, the non-striker shall be run out if he is out of his ground when his wicket is caught by a bowler throwing the ball over the stumps or by catching the ball. whether the ball is subsequently delivered or not.”

The MCC once again put the onus on the non-striker. “The MCC’s message to non-strikers will remain on their ground until they see the ball leaving the bowler’s hand. Then the dismissal, as of tomorrow (Saturday),” the MCC said in a statement on Sunday. Was seen, can’t be.” ,

If Deepti’s act could be called a sharp exercise, then Dean’s act was clearly illegal.

According to a Twitter thread (https://bit.ly/3ShDzFA) by Peter Della Penna (@PeterDellaPenna), Dean “quickly left his crease 73 times” while in the middle. This is not a mistake, but a deliberate attempt to take undue advantage.

England’s supporters trying to build their argument based on an abstract idea of ​​the SOC, while disregarding something as concrete as a clearly defined law, are both laughable and sad reflections on their inability to incur harm. .

Originally published at Pen 18