Infotainment Factory: Bizarre delivery sends cricket world into a spin

Trending

>

Post Top Ad

Post Top Ad

Thursday, 8 November 2018

Bizarre delivery sends cricket world into a spin


//

The cricket world has been left divided after a domestic Indian spin bowler’s unique action resulted in a warning from the match umpire after bringing the game to a halt.

The incident occurred during CK Nayudu Trophy between Bengal and Uttar Pradesh, when under 23 Utter Pradesh spinner Shiva Singh tried something little bit different that has been hailed as revolutionary and forward thinking by several pundits.

As the left-armer moves in for his approach to a delivery during his side’s second innings, he completes a 360-degree turn before the ball leaves his hands.

Umpire Vinod Seshan indicated it would be ruled a dead ball and then stopped proceedings to warn Singh that a repeat offence would force officials to rule them as ‘dead’ according to ESPN Cricinfo.

Singh and his teammates seemed a bit miffed by the call, especially after Singh had used the same turn in a match last month, which did not draw the ire of the umpires.

He told the website that since batsmen are permitted to switch hit, bowlers should also be allowed to add an air of unpredictability to their action.

“I use different variations in one-dayers and T20s so I thought of doing the same because the Bengal batsmen were developing a partnership," Shiva said.

"The umpires said ‘dead ball’, so I asked ‘why are you calling it a dead ball?’

"I delivered this 360-degree ball against Kerala in the Vijay Hazare Trophy as well, where it was fine. Batsmen always go for the reverse-sweep or the switch-hit against bowlers. But when bowlers do something like this it's deemed a dead ball."

Despite the move being celebrated by a new breed of cricket fans, the laws of the game state that Singh’s action could be deemed as a ‘deliberate attempt to distract the batsman’, which is illegal.

According to the former umpire once regarded as the world’s best, Simon Taufel, Singh’s argument about bowlers being allowed to switch like batsmen lacks weight because of the bowler’s intent.

"The intent of the reverse action is different," Taufel told cricketnext.

"One is necessary to play the shot, the other is not in order to maintain the same mode of delivery."

Taufel sided with umpire Seshan over the incident, claiming Singh’s motives were questionable and his actions could be seen as unfair.

"The umpire is entitled to call and signal dead ball under Law 20.4.2.1 (unfair play) or 20.4.2.7 (deliberate attempt to distract/deceive/obstruct). It's up to the umpire but one would have to ask why the bowler did this and have to assume the only reason would be to distract or put the striker off. Doesn't seem right or fair to me. If it is his normal bowling action then maybe a different outcome."

In response to the validity of the turn, Marylebone Cricket Club, the law-keepers of the sport, declared it was up to the umpire on the ground at the time to assess the situation and make a ruling based on the facts.

"Unless the 360 degree twirl was part of the bowler's run-up for every ball, the umpire may need to consider whether he/she feels that the twirl was done in an attempt to distract the batsman in some way. This is particularly so if there was no apparent advantage to be gained from the twirl, unlike, for example, the bowler varying the width of the release point or the length of his/her run-up, which are entirely lawful.

"If the batsman is distracted, he/she is entitled to withdraw from his/her stance and, if the umpire feels there has been a deliberate attempt to distract, then the procedure in Law 41.4 will be followed, including the awarding of 5 Penalty runs.

"If the striker has not been distracted, play can continue as normal unless the umpire intervenes and calls dead ball...

"The umpire in this example felt that Law 41.4 had been breached, but it is not clear from the footage or reports whether or not he awarded 5 Penalty runs to the batting side."

According ESPNcricinfo no penalty runs were awarded.

Despite the ruling, former players of the game gave a variety of views on the validity of the move.

https://twitter.com/MichaelVaughan/status/1060425951929122816

https://twitter.com/copes9/status/1060456562660040705

Former England skipper Michael Vaughan seemed encouraged by the bowler taking a chance to shake things up and called for more progression to the artistry of bowling.

Former Australian fast bowler Trent Copeland seemed to be open to the action, suggesting the approach might be easier for the batsman to play rather than the bowler to execute.

While, legendary India spinner Bishan Singh Bedi called Shiva "weirdo".

https://twitter.com/BishanBedi/status/1060255516109271040

One of the opposition players who faced Shiva during the match in question, said he’d faced the bowler before and was well aware of his tactics.

"I know Shiva and I've played him before, and he has uncanny ways of distracting the batsman," the Bengal player said.

"But I wasn't fazed by it. The umpire did call it a dead ball and he explained to the UP captain and bowler that under MCC's latest laws, if the bowler turns around in that manner, then it's a disturbance or distraction to the batsman.

“And he told the captain that every time he bowls that ball, it would be deemed a dead ball. The UP captain argued for a few minutes and play continued thereafter.

"Shiva is a spinner who is capable of bowling a bouncer because of his strong left shoulder. He has a couple of different actions - sometimes he doesn't lift his non-bowling arm.

“Sometimes he walks up to the crease like a zombie, but he's got good control over them. But even when Shiva turned around and bowled, I wasn't aware of the distraction rule and if he bowled more than once, I would be totally cool to face him.

“But the umpire was clear on his action being a distraction to the batsman, so Shiva did not repeat that action."

The cricket world has been left divided after a domestic Indian spin bowler’s unique action resulted in a warning from the match umpire after bringing the game to a halt.

The incident occurred during CK Nayudu Trophy between Bengal and Uttar Pradesh, when under 23 Utter Pradesh spinner Shiva Singh tried something little bit different that has been hailed as revolutionary and forward thinking by several pundits.

As the left-armer moves in for his approach to a delivery during his side’s second innings, he completes a 360-degree turn before the ball leaves his hands.

Umpire Vinod Seshan indicated it would be ruled a dead ball and then stopped proceedings to warn Singh that a repeat offence would force officials to rule them as ‘dead’ according to ESPN Cricinfo.

Singh and his teammates seemed a bit miffed by the call, especially after Singh had used the same turn in a match last month, which did not draw the ire of the umpires.

He told the website that since batsmen are permitted to switch hit, bowlers should also be allowed to add an air of unpredictability to their action.

“I use different variations in one-dayers and T20s so I thought of doing the same because the Bengal batsmen were developing a partnership," Shiva said.

"The umpires said ‘dead ball’, so I asked ‘why are you calling it a dead ball?’

"I delivered this 360-degree ball against Kerala in the Vijay Hazare Trophy as well, where it was fine. Batsmen always go for the reverse-sweep or the switch-hit against bowlers. But when bowlers do something like this it's deemed a dead ball."

Despite the move being celebrated by a new breed of cricket fans, the laws of the game state that Singh’s action could be deemed as a ‘deliberate attempt to distract the batsman’, which is illegal.

According to the former umpire once regarded as the world’s best, Simon Taufel, Singh’s argument about bowlers being allowed to switch like batsmen lacks weight because of the bowler’s intent.

"The intent of the reverse action is different," Taufel told cricketnext.

"One is necessary to play the shot, the other is not in order to maintain the same mode of delivery."

Taufel sided with umpire Seshan over the incident, claiming Singh’s motives were questionable and his actions could be seen as unfair.

"The umpire is entitled to call and signal dead ball under Law 20.4.2.1 (unfair play) or 20.4.2.7 (deliberate attempt to distract/deceive/obstruct). It's up to the umpire but one would have to ask why the bowler did this and have to assume the only reason would be to distract or put the striker off. Doesn't seem right or fair to me. If it is his normal bowling action then maybe a different outcome."

In response to the validity of the turn, Marylebone Cricket Club, the law-keepers of the sport, declared it was up to the umpire on the ground at the time to assess the situation and make a ruling based on the facts.

"Unless the 360 degree twirl was part of the bowler's run-up for every ball, the umpire may need to consider whether he/she feels that the twirl was done in an attempt to distract the batsman in some way. This is particularly so if there was no apparent advantage to be gained from the twirl, unlike, for example, the bowler varying the width of the release point or the length of his/her run-up, which are entirely lawful.

"If the batsman is distracted, he/she is entitled to withdraw from his/her stance and, if the umpire feels there has been a deliberate attempt to distract, then the procedure in Law 41.4 will be followed, including the awarding of 5 Penalty runs.

"If the striker has not been distracted, play can continue as normal unless the umpire intervenes and calls dead ball...

"The umpire in this example felt that Law 41.4 had been breached, but it is not clear from the footage or reports whether or not he awarded 5 Penalty runs to the batting side."

According ESPNcricinfo no penalty runs were awarded.

Despite the ruling, former players of the game gave a variety of views on the validity of the move.

https://twitter.com/MichaelVaughan/status/1060425951929122816

https://twitter.com/copes9/status/1060456562660040705

Former England skipper Michael Vaughan seemed encouraged by the bowler taking a chance to shake things up and called for more progression to the artistry of bowling.

Former Australian fast bowler Trent Copeland seemed to be open to the action, suggesting the approach might be easier for the batsman to play rather than the bowler to execute.

While, legendary India spinner Bishan Singh Bedi called Shiva "weirdo".

https://twitter.com/BishanBedi/status/1060255516109271040

One of the opposition players who faced Shiva during the match in question, said he’d faced the bowler before and was well aware of his tactics.

"I know Shiva and I've played him before, and he has uncanny ways of distracting the batsman," the Bengal player said.

"But I wasn't fazed by it. The umpire did call it a dead ball and he explained to the UP captain and bowler that under MCC's latest laws, if the bowler turns around in that manner, then it's a disturbance or distraction to the batsman.

“And he told the captain that every time he bowls that ball, it would be deemed a dead ball. The UP captain argued for a few minutes and play continued thereafter.

"Shiva is a spinner who is capable of bowling a bouncer because of his strong left shoulder. He has a couple of different actions - sometimes he doesn't lift his non-bowling arm.

“Sometimes he walks up to the crease like a zombie, but he's got good control over them. But even when Shiva turned around and bowled, I wasn't aware of the distraction rule and if he bowled more than once, I would be totally cool to face him.

“But the umpire was clear on his action being a distraction to the batsman, so Shiva did not repeat that action."

https://ift.tt/2QA2uV6
//

No comments:

Post a Comment