CRICKET

Gisborne Times, Volume LXXI, Issue 11376, 29 November 1930, Page 12

CRICKET

UNUSUAL WAYS OF SCORING. SOME POINTS OF CRICKET LAW. HOW RUNS MAY BE MADE . ' BEFORE BALL IS BOWLED. A FINE “BULL.” There) is a cricket enthusiast in Kaiapoi who deserves my warmest thanks, becaus*e, unconsciously, ho has directed my attention to a delightful “bull” that'! had overlooked before, although it,appears.in a ruling of the 'Marylebone Cricket Club, which is the ultimate authority on questions arisr ing out of the Englishman’s national game, writes “A.L.0.” in the Christchurch “Sun.” t •' • This Kaiapoi correspondent lias asked me to answer five questions relating to the laws of the game. He explains that thero is no wager on the' questions, hut they have been put to me in oonseqeuiice of discussions'upon thorn at his club’s practices. To thorn I have added a sixth which I heard put by a player to a scorer at Hagley Park recently, and which is related to one of the Kaiapoi player’s questions. „ Tho six questions are’: *■ • \ " (1) Does a bowler have to complete his action in delivering tho ball before he ' can run out a ' batsman who is backing up?. " (2) If a bowler attempts to throw tho wicket down, to run out a batsman who is backing up, but be misses the stumps and the ball goes to tho •boundary, what, should tho runs he credited to, if credited at all?

(3) Is it possible for a run to bo scored.before a-bowler has bowled the ball?

. (The. .questioner- adds : “Bv this I mean-a-fast bowler, for example, taking a long run and the batsman running a run before be lias delivered tlie ball.”),

(4) When does a ball become “alive” after it lias been returned to .■the bowler by the wicketkeeper ?

(5) If a bowler, in his run to the wickets to deliver tho hall, drops tlie ball, is it a no-ball ?'

(6) How soon after a ball lias settled in tbo wicketkeeper’s bands, from a bowl,' does it become dead ?

bowler who knows the laws thero probably would be a the provisions in the - rules are not foolish.' For one thing, they provide a moans by which batsmen may penalise a bowler who takes an exaggerated run in an endeavour to waste time. - -

Some years .ago, in a minor match in Australia, I believe, a team which was batting against a fast bowler, on a concrete wicket, needed one run for a win when tho ninth wicket fell. . The last man in was a “rabbit,” who was considered most unlikely to survive the first ball, he received from- the fast- bcwler. The fast bowler took a very long run, As soon as he started his'run tho batsmen ran, and completed the winning run before the fielding' side fully . realised what bad happened. There was a. lot of argument then—probably because none of the contestants had a,copy of the AI.C.C. decisions and interpretations,- but on appeal to the ultimate authority tho claim of the batsmen to tho run they had scored' was lield to be valid. - The fourth , and fifth questions may bo considered together. Tho fourth has. really been answered already, by quotationof the,note-to laws.33a and 33b..; But it- may be of- interest to cricket enthusiasts to go beyond the scope of the question and consider just when -a- ball becomes “dead.” Tho M.O.C. has ruled that a ball can become ‘“dead” only under laws 33a, 33b, 34, 35, 41 and 50, or on the call of a boundary. The occasions referred to by these laws arc: When a batsman is out; when tho ball, whether, or not it is struck by the bat, lodges in a batsman’s clothing; when “lost ball” lias been .called: when the ball has been finally . settled in- the'- wicketkCeper’-S '.or. Hiewler’s hand-; -when a-fieldsman- stops the bafl-othorwiso than with any part of his' person; when the umpire has called “Over.”

The only time when it is not apparent immediately that the ball is “dead” is, then, when it “has finally settled in tlie wicketkeeper’s or howler’s hand.”

I heard a scorer-member of the Canterbury Umpires’. Association answer, when this question was put to him by.. a player, that the ball becomes dead three seconds after, the wicketkeeper lias taken it, from a delivery by the bowler. Now, some umpires may have an understanding that in normal circumstances ‘the ball becomes- “dead” three seconds after tho wicketkeeper receives it, blit that should nob be regarded as . a rule. Clearly, if.the AI.C.C. has -thought that three seconds formed a sufficient time applicable iu all- circumstances it would have said so. Instead, it left the question for individual umpires to decide, with regard to the particular cricumstances.- Any umpire who adopted for himself a uniform application of a three-second limit, or any other time-limit, and who did not depart from it whatever the circumstances, would not bo carrying out the M.C.C.’s instructions. There are times when the ball should be regarded as “finally settled,’-’ in doss than tliree seconds. '

Now, the M.C.CVs note on this point is: “Whetjier the ball is ‘finally settled’ is a question of fact for tho umpire only to decide.”

Let tlie serious aspect of these questions be considered before the touch of humour, that one of them uncovers is noted. In answering the questions I quote from a booklet issued by the M.C.0., in which that body appends to tho lavs of cricket certain decisions and interpretations which have been authorised by it, hut which are not to be found in “John Wisden’s Cricketers’ Almanack,” or in ■ the average publications of the laws. As tho questions are of general interest to cricket enthusiasts I deal, with them at some length.. The answer to the first question is “No.” As soon as the bowler begins his run or howling action the' hall ceases to be “dead,” and the batsman who is at the howler’s-end may be run out if ho is out of his ground. Law 35 supplies the answer to both tho first and second questions. That part of it which hears on the points raised is: “When the howler is about to deliver the ball, if the batsman at his wicket be out of his ground before actual delivery, the howler may run him out; but if the howler throw at that wicket and any run result, it shall he scored ‘no hall.’ ” A note appended to that law runs: “A howler may run a batsman out,- without having delivered the hall, in any way authorised by the laws. He may have passed the bowling crease hi his run, or may change the hall from one hand to the other before throwing at the wicket or knocking off tile.-bails. The bails may be knocked off from either side of the wickets.” This note does not appear in “Wisden,” but.it is in the booklet of the .laws of cricket issued'by the M.C.C. Clearly, if - such a rule did not exist it would be possible for the batsman at. the bowler's end to make only a. .very short run when the striker hit the ball. ; Question No. 3., the- answer .to which is -‘Yes,’ is not merely a hypothetical- one ;' it actually 'arose m a match some. years ago. But - here it is.' ail advantage : to aygue < the law heforrt'a specific case is/dealt with. Apart from ) penalties incurred by fieldra" sides under, certain a run is'kcdrod: ‘‘So often as the batsmen, after a. hit, or any time while the-Vail is'in play,.shall have crossed, and'made good their ground from end to end.” That - is • a quotation from Law-2. (i The pertinent words . here aro or at any time while the ball is in play ” The M.C.O. has ruled,' in -a. note to laws 33a '.and 33b, .which deals with certain ways in which the ball becomes “dead”--that “the hall ceases to bo ‘dead’ when tlio howler , begins his /J-uii or bowling . begins.” ..fedme slow 'bowlers deliver the hall without a runhence the putting'in the alternative. J However, no one' is likely, to; attempt, a run while a : slow howler is preparing to deliver the- hall. . , „ , The inquirer has cited -’ the case of a fast howler who; takes a long run. The haill "becomes ; “in'play” as soon as the bowler starts his J run. A; run maw he scored “at : any .time., while tho ; ball ik-in Splay-.!’ two'! provisions together the answer-.'becomes .plain. , the howler’s ; run iwo'uld'have to : be a- very long one ’ if the'batsmen were - to get a run in while he-was making it, and if ‘they, did‘attempt’ a'lruU' against; a

Not infrequently does a bowler drop the ball in his run to the wicket, but when lie does'so a “no-ball” is not recorded. That is the answer to No. 5.

Here, again, ki wider field than is covered by the correspondent’s question may be considered. Occasionally it happens that through some fault in tko bowler’s delivery, the- ball does not reach the striker. Tho M.O.C. lias appended to Law 12 a note which contains a gorgeous “bull/’ but the intention of which is clear. It runs: “When the ball has been .delivered but remains stationary before reaching the striker no runs can be added to the score, unless it has-been struck by the striker. The-striker has a right to hit the ball without interference by the field. The umpire must decide if the ball has been ‘delivered. L” In the instance cited by the correspondent the ball obviously has not been “delivered,” and it does not count in any way; the bowler simply starts again.. But if, instead of dropping -the ball on his way to the bowl-ing-crease, he completes his bowling action but the ball slips in his hand at the end of liis action, and goes only a. little wav up the pitch, there to stop, ' it; is for 1 the umpire to decide whether or not it lias been “delivered.” If the umpire considers that it has. not been “delivered” no runs ' may be scored ' off it, and it is not reckoned as part of the 'oyer. Cricket .is: a wonderful 'game !•• As

you seei evenin a-serious discussion of rules one may find somerhumour. Tho MiC.C. committee which drafted a ruling containing tlfat gorgeous phrase “remains / stationary beforo reaching , the striker” .. deserves to bo ranked with the'immortals.

MACARTNEY’S .- REMINISCENCES.

Here, are some, sentences chosen at random from ,C.; tl.' Slacartney-. s/bopk of cricket reminiscences '< ' •//. Colin Blythe was :the best leftJiaiider on English wickets •11 have; over t In.Braund I consider England had the best' slip field I have’ jpver' seen.. Ceorge Hirst.' created tho - swinp;, and had. the, honor. of .adding ~ /something' to;, the' game, but .that _.. saving has.; sqmetjiiing /tp/do •"with. tho ..weakness' of -bowling,.to-day. .. .. . . Barnes 1 was; the 'best bowler: England produced in his time, : and he i£j tho - best ’ bowler I have met on all

wickets, whether at home- or abroad. Tate is'a, better bowler in Australia than in England, aiid Eosier was the same. . ' v , / Archie MaeLaren was .tho best opposing captain I have known. BOWLERS, PAST AND PRESENT. , Not yet. is ' cricket’s great Ranjitsihkji, . nowadays his Highness the Jam of Nawanagar, prepared -to rank Clarence Grimmott among tlio great bowlers, or Don Bra'diriSn with Victor Trumper, Clem .Hill and Charlie. Macartney. Ho gives ,-his- reasons- in a letter he has written to a friend at Rugby, commenting on this year’s Tests between Australia and England.. What strikes Ranji as a feature much'to be lamented is the decay of bowling in . England and in Australia. Ranji admits that Grimmett is the best bowler in she two interna-

tional sides, but says that he is one who is dependent on the-state of 1 the wicket to a great extent It was not- 1 thus, lie says, in the heyday of TOm. Richardson,. Hugh Trumbio and George Lohmann, to. name only three giants of old. • They could never heordinary; whatever the state of the ground. . It' is for this reason that the performances of Bradman, in the opinion of Ranji, are mot enough to raise him to the level of Trumper, Hill'.and Macartney, as they achieved greatness in'spite of great bowling. Looking ahead, the Jam Sahib thinks and hopes that in a season or two Don Bradman will possibly beat Macartney, and lie is fairly confident that his nephew, K. S. Duleepsinhji, though not till two or. three years have elapsed, .will reach the top class and rank with Hobbs, the oniy incon-testable-star among -English batsmen. . NOTES AND NEWS. •'•

L. N. Constantine, a member oi the West' indies cricket team, is “Learpy” to the Trinidad and other West Indian crowds, as this is ills first- Christum name.. Just ,28 years oi age and right at his top in his cricket and athletic life, in.his own country it is questioned if there is a better all-round cricketer in die world just now t-iian Constantine, his fielding being ranked “on its owii.” Unlike some fast bowlers, he does not take an inordinately long run, just one about 10 to 12 yards. The statement is made by the

“Cricketer” that F. it. Spelt or til -.was born iu New Zealand, “apparently on authority which is beyond dispute.” V> fiat is the authority?., Air C. W... Beal, manager oi the 1882 team, wrote the tabloid biographies of members- or. that team tor Pardon’s book dealing with the tour, iu it- he states that Spoilorth was born in Balmain (says the “Referee.”) Spotforth himself wrote his autobiography for “Ai.A.P.” (T. P. O’Connor’s weekly). In this lie said: “I was born at Balmain, on the yeti September, 1855, but my first recollections aro of • New Zealand, when livmg at Hokianga, i had received a good flogging at the hands of the parents of a boy I liad been fighting. This I never forgot-.”. That was typical of “Spoff.-,” who- certainly was born in Balmain.

When! tho -first English team visited Australia/ they found Australian batsmen as much ,at sea against slow howling as many # English batsmen still are. R. C. Tinley, who sent down lobs, was Englands 1 slow bowler in 186-1. Against 22 of Victoria, he took 19 wickets for 115, and against 22 of New South Wales, he got 10 for '33. - As the years have sped,- Australians have- realised more than Englishmen the necessity for footwork in playing slows.