Qs for Umps
alvey
the rope (both feet) and then launched himself off the ground to take a
catch and landed with both feet in the field of play.
Q1. What was the umps ruling?
Q2. What is your ruling?
alvey
dechucka
"alvey" <al...@play.com> wrote in message
news:ufexm8cmrham.imi83wwhzp0x$.dlg@40tude.net...
> In a recent domestic Oz T20 a fielder out in the country stepped outside
> the rope (both feet) and then launched himself off the ground to take a
> catch and landed with both feet in the field of play.
>
> Q1. What was the umps ruling?
Out
> Q2. What is your ruling?
Out, should it be probably not IMHO
Unknown
>In a recent domestic Oz T20 a fielder out in the country stepped outside
>the rope (both feet) and then launched himself off the ground to take a
>catch and landed with both feet in the field of play.
>
>Q1. What was the umps ruling?
Out
>Q2. What is your ruling?
Out
>
>alvey
Was that the Ben Dunk one?
It's a cool one.
The fielder and he is a fielder must inform the umpire if he needs to
leave the field. In this incident the umpire can clearly see why the
fielder needs to leave the field. A player needs permission to return
to the field of play, but a player is not a fielder a fielder needs no
such pemissions, anyway the umpire must give permission for a "player"
to return as soon as -" so it is obvious that the fielder intends to
return to the field to contain the catch, so no words are needed. How
could you say any words with your mouth hangn' open and your finger
going up?
The thing that bothers me is when does a fielder become a player?
Fielders are on the ground, players are on the nomination list. If a
fielder is replaced by a sub then I reckon that is when he becomes a
player. In this case the answer to the Dunker should be not out, and
would be not out.
Fran
IMO, if a player leaves the field *and is replaced by a sub* then the
above returning to the field rules should apply. Some fielders are
faster than others, have stronger arms and are more agile. OTOH, if he
or she leaves *without being replaced* then there ought be no
requirement implied as the fielding team suffers a clear and 100%
uncompensated disadvantage. The striker should always assume that
there are 11 fielders with access to the field of play and assume that
they are roughly where they are when the bowler begins the delivery
approach. I suppose if the fielder had secreted himself near the
boundary at deep midwicket only to emerge from beyond the pickets and
the crowd to take a catch in what might have appeared to the striker
as an undefended part of the boundary then this might be considered
contrary to the SOTG, but being in one's full kit between a roped off
area and the pickets in plain sight surely wouldn't be.
Fran
dechucka
"max.it" wrote in message news:4b41059e...@news.btinternet.com...
> On Mon, 4 Jan 2010 06:34:21 +1000, alvey <al...@play.com> wrote:
>
>>In a recent domestic Oz T20 a fielder out in the country stepped outside
>>the rope (both feet) and then launched himself off the ground to take a
>>catch and landed with both feet in the field of play.
>>
>>Q1. What was the umps ruling?
>
> Out
>
>>Q2. What is your ruling?
>
> Out
>
>>
>>alvey
>
> Was that the Ben Dunk one?
>
> It's a cool one.
> The fielder and he is a fielder must inform the umpire if he needs to
> leave the field. In this incident the umpire can clearly see why the
> fielder needs to leave the field. A player needs permission to return
> to the field of play, but a player is not a fielder a fielder needs no
> such pemissions, anyway the umpire must give permission for a "player"
> to return as soon as -" so it is obvious that the fielder intends to
> return to the field to contain the catch, so no words are needed. How
> could you say any words with your mouth hangn' open and your finger
> going up?
No provision for mind reading or the "obvious" in Law 2
> The thing that bothers me is when does a fielder become a player?
> Fielders are on the ground, players are on the nomination list. If a
> fielder is replaced by a sub then I reckon that is when he becomes a
> player. In this case the answer to the Dunker should be not out, and
> would be not out.
A fielder is always a player as this status is conferred on him before the
toss. A player is always a player until substituted
Law 1 2. Nomination of players
Each captain shall nominate his players in writing to one of the umpires
before the toss. No player may be changed after the nomination without the
consent of the opposing captain.
dechucka
"Fran" <fran...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:38b56c13-c340-4424...@v25g2000yqk.googlegroups.com...
=======================================================
It's not the SOTG that is in question here it is compliance with the Laws of
the Game.
dechucka
"dechucka" <vo...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:h8adnW6wAPp6i9zW...@westnet.com.au...
>
> "max.it" wrote in message news:4b41059e...@news.btinternet.com...
>> On Mon, 4 Jan 2010 06:34:21 +1000, alvey <al...@play.com> wrote:
>>
>>>In a recent domestic Oz T20 a fielder out in the country stepped outside
>>>the rope (both feet) and then launched himself off the ground to take a
>>>catch and landed with both feet in the field of play.
>>>
>>>Q1. What was the umps ruling?
>>
>> Out
>>
>>>Q2. What is your ruling?
>>
>> Out
>>
>>>
>>>alvey
>>
>> Was that the Ben Dunk one?
>>
>> It's a cool one.
>> The fielder and he is a fielder must inform the umpire if he needs to
>> leave the field. In this incident the umpire can clearly see why the
>> fielder needs to leave the field. A player needs permission to return
>> to the field of play, but a player is not a fielder a fielder needs no
>> such pemissions, anyway the umpire must give permission for a "player"
>> to return as soon as -" so it is obvious that the fielder intends to
>> return to the field to contain the catch, so no words are needed. How
>> could you say any words with your mouth hangn' open and your finger
>> going up?
>
> No provision for mind reading or the "obvious" in Law 2
However I should add that no player asks permission to leave the feild to
retrieve the ball or to return having collected it. So if the player taking
the catch was in the feild of play when the ball became live than I stand
with my original interpretation of the decision.
Unknown
wrote:
>toss. A player is always a player until substituted.
Nahh. A player is nominated, a fielder is one of the 11 on the field..
>
>Law 1 2. Nomination of players
>Each captain shall nominate his players in writing to one of the umpires
>before the toss. No player may be changed after the nomination without the
>consent of the opposing captain.
True, you can't change a player after nomination.
Unknown
wrote:
Agreed on that. The answer is in the appendix of the blue book.
All the same crossing the appendix over the laws real quick as in that
scenario, who knows what way the finger would go in the heat of the
moment.
dechucka
"max.it" wrote in message news:4b4117dc...@news.btinternet.com...
So once a person is nominated he is a player just because the person is
fielding does not change his status as a player only gives him the added
status as a fielder. All fielders are players ( except some substitutes )
but not all players are fielders
>>
>>Law 1 2. Nomination of players
>>Each captain shall nominate his players in writing to one of the umpires
>>before the toss. No player may be changed after the nomination without the
>>consent of the opposing captain.
>
> True, you can't change a player after nomination.
Actually you can with the permission of the opposition Capt see above
dechucka
Appendix D
>
dechucka
"max.it" wrote in message news:4b4119ca...@news.btinternet.com...
As you mentioned appendix D you may be interested in this definition
"Fielder is any one of those 11 or fewer players currently on the field of
play who together compose the fielding side. ===== "
Unknown
wrote:
Maybe it is something to do with the speed of usenet propagation, but
your are you taking late pills? Nahh, you couldn't be. You just
haven't bothered to read what I have written above.
Unknown
wrote:
A player is nominated, an un-nominated person can be a fielder.
>All fielders are players ( except some substitutes )
>but not all players are fielders
No, fielders don't have to be players.
>
>>>
>>>Law 1 2. Nomination of players
>>>Each captain shall nominate his players in writing to one of the umpires
>>>before the toss. No player may be changed after the nomination without the
>>>consent of the opposing captain.
>>
>> True, you can't change a player after nomination.
>
>Actually you can with the permission of the opposition Capt see above.
True.
dechucka
"max.it" wrote in message news:4b412571...@news.btinternet.com...
I was just adding it an addendum to what we had previously been discussing
and your seeming insistence that a fieldsman is not a player
dechucka
"max.it" wrote in message news:4b412633...@news.btinternet.com...
See my comments from this thread " So once a person is nominated he is a
player just because the person is
fielding does not change his status as a player only gives him the added
status as a fielder. All fielders are players ( except some substitutes )
but not all players are fielders"
The substitution factor does come into play.
jzfredricks
someone's shoulders, catches the ball... and is then carried back on
to the field?
just wondering
wrt to the OP's question... if I was the umpire, I'd rule not out
(being the maverick that I am)
Lawrence�Logic
> the rope (both feet) and then launched himself off the ground to take a
> catch and landed with both feet in the field of play.
>
> Q1. What was the umps ruling?
>
Out?
>
> Q2. What is your ruling?
>
Out!
I think the intention in Law 2 is that the fielder is leaving the field to
go somewhere eg dressing room, and wasn't intended to cover momentarily
crossing the boundary.
Law 32 is quite specific about what constitutes a fair catch. In the
instance above, neither the ball nor the fielder were touching or over the
boundary when the catch was made. 32.3(f) even allows for the ball crossing
the boundary and still be caught fairly.
Unless they introduce a Law that states that the fielder cannot leave the
field of play in order to effect a catch, the above scenario will always by
Out.
Here's an interesting hypothetical, though, which relates to the picket
fence being the boundary. What if a ball is too high for the fielder to
catch it, but he/she leaps onto the fence and then leaps up from the fence
to catch the ball and land in the field of play? Under the Laws, that would
also be a fair catch.
--
Lawrence
"My underpants are so far up my butt crack, my legs are numb!" - "Butters"
Stotch - 14 October 2009
alvey
> Q1. What was the umps ruling?
Six.
>
> Q2. What is your ruling?
Consensus says 'Out'.
alvey
Nirvanam
My ruling is that it should be "Out". Leaving the fine print of the
laws (which may or may not agree with my ruling in this particular
instance), I think it is a fair way to get someone out. The most
important thing is that the effort requires ingenuity, presence of
mind, and skill to effect the out. It is only showing us what humans
are capable off and hence I think it needs to be recognized for what
it is: a brilliant piece of fielding to get a wicket.
jzfredricks
> important thing is that the effort requires ingenuity, presence of
> mind, and skill to effect the out.
So is using my hat to catch it, but that aint gunna fly.
Unknown
wrote:
Well done, you have totally baffled me now.
Maxx
> In a recent domestic Oz T20 a fielder out in the country stepped outside
> the rope (both feet) and then launched himself off the ground to take a
> catch and landed with both feet in the field of play.
>
> Q1. What was the umps ruling?
No idea.
> Q2. What is your ruling?
Not out, dwee.
dechucka
"max.it" wrote in message news:4b4244c7...@news.btinternet.com...
Not to hard. Someone just has to discuss cricket with you are baffled.
dechucka
"jzfredricks" <jzfre...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:e208bd8b-c885-475e...@k17g2000yqh.googlegroups.com...
Specifically ruled out in the Laws
dechucka
"Maxx" <sc...@executivemail.co.za> wrote in message
news:6a026168-599f-4fe1...@k19g2000yqc.googlegroups.com...
No idea.
Not out, dwee.
=====================
On what basis?
Unknown
wrote:
Congratulations,
Not all fielders are players. You don't have to be a nominated player
to be a fielder. A fielder is one of the 11 on the field of play, if
he is nominated and in the shed having a crap he is not a fielder, but
the groundsman subbing for him is a fielder but not a player.
The icc comditions mention that a fielder leaving the field of play to
take a catch is still a fielder (or some such words)
I reckon you are probably as dumb as or even a little dumber than me.
dechucka
"max.it" wrote in message news:4b43ce84...@news.btinternet.com...
but he is still a player in this case a crap onebut
> the groundsman subbing for him is a fielder but not a player.
> The icc comditions mention that a fielder leaving the field of play to
> take a catch is still a fielder (or some such words)
How can you take a "catch" outside the feild of play?
>
> I reckon you are probably as dumb as or even a little dumber than me.
Yay you seem to be finally getting it. It really is a very simple concept. A
player's status as a player does not change when he becomes a fielder. He
just happens to be a player who is fielding. A fielder who is not a player
can't become a player.
dechucka
> On Mon, 4 Jan 2010 06:34:21 +1000, alvey wrote:
>
>
>> Q1. What was the umps ruling?
>
> Six.
I actually like this ruling but can't find any basis for it. To me this
analogous to a batsman jumping up behind the crease and being run out
because he is not touching the ground.
dechucka
Sorry which I have always thought was a bit stupid
>
>
Unknown
wrote:
Catch the ball in the air outside the rope, and then then land within
the rope to complete that catch.
>
>>
>> I reckon you are probably as dumb as or even a little dumber than me.
>
>Yay you seem to be finally getting it. It really is a very simple concept. A
>player's status as a player does not change when he becomes a fielder. He
>just happens to be a player who is fielding. A fielder who is not a player
>can't become a player.
>
Isn't that what I said?
dechucka
"max.it" wrote in message news:4b44f0be...@news.btinternet.com...
Thus the catch is not taken outside the feild of play ( by definition a
catch can't be taken outside the fop
32
3. A fair catch
A catch shall be considered to have been fairly made if
(a) throughout the act of making the catch
(i) any fielder in contact with the ball is within the field of play. See 4
below.
(ii) the ball is at no time in contact with any object grounded beyond the
boundary.
The act of making the catch shall start from the time when a fielder first
handles the ball and shall end when a fielder obtains complete control both
over the ball and over his own movement.
>
>>
>>>
>>> I reckon you are probably as dumb as or even a little dumber than me.
>>
>>Yay you seem to be finally getting it. It really is a very simple concept.
>>A
>>player's status as a player does not change when he becomes a fielder. He
>>just happens to be a player who is fielding. A fielder who is not a player
>>can't become a player.
>>
>
> Isn't that what I said?
YES YES but I said exactly the same thing very much earlier in the thread
and you continued to argue. Finally you have figured out what a player and a
fielder are.