5

An interesting situation occurred in a club game this weekend. A full toss was bowled by a medium pace bowler that was over the batsmans head. The batsman had attempted to charge the bowler, missed the attempted overhead smash tennis shot and was stumped by the wicket keeper who was standing up.

Ordinarily a No-Ball would be awarded for the ball being above stump height as it passes the batsmans crease. Therefore the umpires decision to give the stumping not out would be correct. However, given that the ball was SO high, should a wide have been given, thus making the umpires decision incorrect?

8

From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_ball#What_constitutes_a_No_ball

"If the ball does not touch the ground in its flight between the wickets and reaches the batsman on the full . . ."

". . . cannot be dismissed so easily by a no ball: a batsman may not be given out . . . stumped . . . off a no ball"

From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wide_%28cricket%29 :

"If a ball qualifies as a no ball as well as a wide, the umpire will call it a no ball instead of a wide, and all the rules for a no ball apply."

Summary:
Umpire was totally correct.

  • 1
    Champion. Wasn't sure about the no-ball taking preference or not. Thank you. – Chris Harland Jun 2 '15 at 15:58
  • 1
    The No Ball, takes precidence in this case to provide the batsmen with protection in just this circumstance from being stumped. – Ben Whyall Jun 3 '15 at 12:36

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.