Run Out with a Runner: It’s cricket and It’s confusing
Another one of the quick posts, This one regarding Cricket and may get controversial as we discuss, but finally i hope to arrive at a decision. This incident happened in a friendly match between the Hytunes, the team who i wicket keep for and Alva Tundu. (Yeah, The name sounds funny! :D)
Alva Tundu is one of another 100 teams that remain optimistic of beating us even after losing 10 straight games. This match ended in a tie though, and that was thanks to a lot of controversies. No regrets, it was a great game of cricket, atleast this brought into light an incident that has never happened in the game of cricket. More information follows…
All’s well for the Hytunes chasing a score of 121 in 15 overs. After a poor start by the Hytunes, A partnership which involved Amjath had brought us back in the game. Amjath got out caught behind to yet another controversial decision. No regrets, the umpire was from our team and he gave it out. Rajeev was on strike and Gopi running for him. At the Non striker end was Madee (I guess! Why do you care, the most important person in discussion are the striker and runner).
The bowler bowled a decent delivery, Rajeev played it into the outfield and went for the run. He saw Gopi midway and realized he had a runner. It was too late and Rajeev decided to reach the non striking end instead of the striking end which the non striker had already reached.
So here we are The striker and the Runner at the non striking end, and the Non striker at the batting end. The fielders gather the ball, knock off the stumps at the striking end and claim Rajeev to be out. After a talk the Hytunes decide and Rajeev was given out run out! My point is that, He’s not out as long as both the runner and the batsmen are inside the crease. What does the rule define?
What better than Google to look up to? I did and there were no answers. Nobody has witnessed such a situation and therefore there aren’t any rules written. Excerpt from Wiki for “Runner” says that If one of them (batsmen or the runner) is outside the crease, then the batsman is given out! In this case both the batsman and runner were inside the crease, hence cannot be given out!
Another point supporting the “not out” is once a batsmen has made the crease, in this case the non striker completing the run to the striker’s end, The stumps broken at this end are invalid. What the opposition did was to break the stumps at the batting end where the non striker was already present, they had to dislodge the stumps at the non striking end to even appeal a wicket. So in any case the argument was favoring us, and the batsman had to be ideally awarded Not Out! Not wanting to spur any further controversy, we went on with the game with batsman being called out.
I was brought into light of the controversy after the game ended. Watching it from the boundary, I thought the batsman didn’t make the crease at the non striking end and therefore it was out. If you think you are good at understanding the rules, please do so with useful links.
I have found the email to ask expert questions to the ICC and this one has been emailed to them, Lets see if they have an article that defines the rule we are confused with.
PS: This post actually wouldn’t qualify as a quick post, but i call it one because I didn’t review it even once. Just corrected a few spell errors using the automatic tool.