Home > Blogging, Cricket > Run Out with a Runner: It’s cricket and It’s confusing

Run Out with a Runner: It’s cricket and It’s confusing

broken_stumpsAnother 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.

Like the Blog post? Subscribe to the RSS Feed by Email.
Rate this Blog? Click here!.

Kunal Janu

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.

Advertisements
  1. LVS
    July 20, 2009 at 3:59 pm

    The batsman is rightfully out.

    After a lot of research, here are my publishings! 😀

    Law 2: 8(c) When a batsman with a runner is striker he remains himself subject to the Laws and will be liable to the penalties that any infringement of them demands.
    Additionally, if he is out of his ground when the wicket is put down at the wicket-keeper’s end, he will be out in the circumstances of Law 38 (Run out) or Law 39 (Stumped) irrespective of the position of the non-striker or of the runner. If he is thus dismissed, runs completed by the runner and the other batsman before the dismissal shall not be scored. However, the penalty for a No ball or a Wide shall stand, together with any penalties to either side that may be awarded when the ball is dead.
    http://www.lords.org/laws-and-spirit/laws-of-cricket/laws/law-2-substitutes-and-runners-batsman-or-fielder-leaving-the-field-batsman-retiring-batsman-commencing-innings,28,AR.html

    Law 29: 2(e) When a batsman with a runner is striker, his ground is always that at the wicket-keeper’s end. However, (a), (b), (c) and (d) above will still apply, but only to the runner and the non-striker, so that that ground will also belong to either the non-striker or the runner, as the case may be.
    http://www.lords.org/laws-and-spirit/laws-of-cricket/laws/law-29-batsman-out-of-his-ground,55,AR.html

    Putting one and two, he’s the striker (Rajeev) is out of his “ground” and hence he’s out, irrespective of the position of the non-striker (Mathi) or the runner (Gopi).

    Interesting case. Though I agree, that’s just one controversy less 🙂

  2. July 20, 2009 at 11:08 pm

    lol

    the lesson is never have a runner!

  3. Kunal Janu
    July 21, 2009 at 7:57 am

    @Lvshankar..
    Thanks for taking time doing the research and discussing with me on IM to clear the controversy from the head.

    @binocula: I’m actually glad that such a thing happened, Now i know the rules more clearly. There are other rules involved too with a by-runner. Read links posted by LVS.

  4. August 6, 2009 at 12:00 am

    Hello!!
    I do exist!! 😀
    But first thing first.. I don’t understand.. You said the non-striker had already reached the batting end and the batsman and the runner had reached the non striker’s end… So where EXACTLY lies the problem????????

  5. October 14, 2009 at 2:56 pm

    Because the striker (injured party) is out of his ground he is out.

    Extract of Law 2 c “Additionally, if he is out of his ground when the wicket is put down at the wicket-keeper’s end, he will be out in the circumstances of Law 38 (Run out) or Law 39 (Stumped) irrespective of the position of the non-striker or of the runner.”

  1. No trackbacks yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: