Jump to content

An interesting LBW dismissal


The Outsider

Recommended Posts

It was Warne's second wicket today, forgot the batsman's name. He was leg before trying to reverse sweep a ball pitched outside leg stump and was given out. Technically, it was not out and if the umpire was aware of it, he would not have raised his finger. But I thought it was a fair decision and perhaps a small footnote is warranted in the LBW law to allow these kind of dismissals?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

>> But I thought it was a fair decision and perhaps a small footnote is warranted in the LBW law to allow these kind of dismissals? For wides, only the original stance of the batsman is considered. ie, just because the batsman turned around while the ball is being bowled, an outside the off ball does not become an outside the leg wide. Maybe the same should continue to hold for lbws.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

>> But I thought it was a fair decision and perhaps a small footnote is warranted in the LBW law to allow these kind of dismissals? For wides, only the original stance of the batsman is considered. ie, just because the batsman turned around while the ball is being bowled, an outside the off ball does not become an outside the leg wide. Maybe the same should continue to hold for lbws.
But, there are also instances when the batsman backs away to the leg and the ball passes between him and the leg stump it is not given as a wide.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Apologies. I was completely wrong there. I think the original stance is considered for lbws, but not for wides (and I mixed up the two). So I have nothing to add to your original post except say again that umpire was probably wrong as per the current interpretation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...