The wording of law 38.3 has been altered to avoid any "ambiguity" but no "material change" has been made to the law's meaning
The MCC has amended the law addressing run outs at the non-striker's end after Adam Zampa's attempted dismissal of Tom Rogers in the Big Bash caused confusion.
The wording of law 38.3 has been changed to avoid any "ambiguity" in its interpretation. However, no "material change" has been made to the law's meaning.
During the clash between Melbourne Stars and Melbourne Renegades, Zampa pulled out of his action and removed the bails before appealing for a run out against Rogers.
However, it was turned down by TV umpire, Shawn Craig, who said Zampa's bowling arm had already passed the point where he would normally have been expected to release the ball. Craig's decision was later supported by the MCC.
Tom Rogers and Adam Zampa talk to the umpire following the incident on January 3 [Daniel Pockett/Getty Images]
Law 38.3 now reads:
38.3.1 At any time from the moment the ball comes into play until the instant when the bowler would normally have been expected to release the ball, the non-striker is liable to be Run out if he/she is out of his/her ground. In these circumstances the non-striker will be out Run out if he/she is out of his/her ground when his/her wicket is put down by the bowler throwing the ball at the stumps or by the bowler’s hand holding the ball, whether or not the ball is subsequently delivered.
38.3.1.1 The instant when the bowler would normally have been expected to release the ball is defined as the moment the bowler's arm reaches the highest point of his/her normal bowling action in the delivery swing.
38.3.1.2 Even if the non-striker had left his/her ground before the instant at which the bowler would normally have been expected to release the ball, once the bowler has reached that point it is no longer possible for the bowler to run out the non-striker under this Law.
The change came into effect on January 19, 2023.
Adam Zampa attempting a run out at the non-striker's end 👀#BBL12pic.twitter.com/9cKDAnqNmF
— The Cricketer (@TheCricketerMag) January 3, 2023
Posted by Ian Campbell on 22/01/2023 at 14:39
So as an umpire I am now required to watch the bowlers front foot and their bowling arm at the same time then half a second later at the other end make a decision on caught behind or lbw. Can we not bring the two together for practical reason and make the front foot landing the decision point.
Posted by David Ansell on 22/01/2023 at 12:53
A prior warning should be written into the law - this would remove all the controversy and smell of bad sportsmanship.
Posted by Mervyn Lack on 21/01/2023 at 22:01
I think the non-striker should be required to retain their ground until the ball has been released. This means that the bowler can attempt a run out at any stage if the non-striker is trying to gain an advantage.
Posted by John Lees on 21/01/2023 at 10:36
I played cricket for over 50 years and was run out once like that when I was about 20. But it never happened again!
Posted by Johnmcmillan McMillan on 20/01/2023 at 16:58
Very good decision a warning first very ungently manner
Welcome to www.thecricketer.com - the online home of the world’s oldest cricket magazine. Breaking news, interviews, opinion and cricket goodness from every corner of our beautiful sport, from village green to national arena.